SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES
AND COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRE-
TARY OF THE ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN
G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE HENSEL AND SENATOR
JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and
FRANCIS p. CARR
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-THIED CONGKESS
SECOND SESSION
PUKSUANT 'XO
S. Res. 189
PART 68
JUNE 16, 1954
Printed for the use of the Committee ou Government Operations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
46620° WASHINGTON : 1954
Cuperi^^«"t of Documents
NOV 2 4 1954
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KARL E. MUNDT, Soutli Daljota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arliansas
MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HENRY M. JACKSON, Wasliington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idalio JOHN F. KENNEDY, Mnssacliusetts
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
JOHN MARSHALL BUTI,ER, Maryland THOMAS A. BURKE. Ohio
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan SAM J. ERVIN, Jr., North Carolina
Richard J. G'Melia, General Counsel
Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk
Special Subcommittee on Investigations
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, lUinols JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idalio STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
Rat H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel
Thomas R. Prevvitt, Assistant Counsel
ROBERT A. Collier, Assistant Counsel
SOLis HORVViTz, Assistant Counsel
Charles A. Maner^ Secretary
CONTENTS
Page
Index I
Testimony of —
McCarthy, Senator Joe, United States Senate 2S12
III
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES AND
COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRETARY OF THE
ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE
HENSEL AND SENATOR JOE MCCARTHY, ROYM.COHN,
AND FRANCIS P. CARR
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 1954
United States Senate,
Special Subcomimittee on Investigations
OF the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington^ D. C.
The subcommittee met at 10 : 15 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the
caucus room of the Senate Office Building, Senator Karl E. Mundt,
chairman, presiding.
Present : Senator Karl E. Mundt, Eepublican, South Dakota ; Sen-
ator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois, Senator Charles
E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator Henry C. Dworshak, Re-
publican, Idaho; Senator John L, McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas;
Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington; and Senator
Stuart Symington, Democrat, Missouri.
Also present : Ray H. Jenkins, chief counsel ; Thomas R. Prevritt,
assistant counsel ; Charles Maner, assistant counsel ; and Ruth Y.
Watt, chief clerk.
Principal participants present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a
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
committee will come to order.
The Chair would like to announce that Senator Potter this morn-
ing is not with us due to the fact that he has scheduled hearings over
which he is presiding, dealing with the problems confronting the tele-
vision industry. Those hearings are going on this morning simul-
taneously with ours.
I would like to begin another morning of the hearings by welcoming
our guests and assuring you that we are happy to have you here in
the committee room with us to give you an opportunity to watch a
segment of your Government in action, and to call your attention once
again to the standing rule which has prevailed throughout these
hearings, the rule adopted by the committee at the very beginning of
the hearings quite some time ago. That rule is to the effect that there
are to be no audible manifestations of approval or disapproval on the
part of the audience at any time or in any way. That includes, of
course, applause.
2811
2812 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
The Chair would like to call your attention to the fact that the uni-
formed members of the Capitol Police force and the plainclothes
people scattered throuo;h the audience, all of whom have done a mag-
nificent job, have standing instructions from the committee to escort
from the room immediately, politely but firmly, any one of you who,
for reasons best known to yourselves, elect to violate the conditions
under which you entered the room by engaging in audible manifesta-
tions of approval or disapproval. So if you separate yourself from
the committee room by violating the terms, that is your privilege and
your responsibility. The officers have their instructions to follow.
Before we begin, may the Chair suggest to the officer in the door-
way, if I may have his attention, to ask those who are not in the
committee room to stand back far enough from the entrance to the
committee room so we can't hear the commotion in the hall. There
are many people this morning who were unable to enter. We hope
during the course of the morning they may be able to be with us for
a while. It is difficult for them, obviously, to remain quiet in the hall-
way so we will ask them to stand back a little bit.
We are read}', then, to begin. Mr. Jenkins, we welcome you back
to the table after your stand-in, Tom Prewitt, of Memphis, who did
a very fine job wdiile interrogating Mr. Carr. We have Senator Mc-
Carthy back on the stand this morning. He is the last witness now,
and we will stay with him until all members of the committee and
all representatives of counsel have asked him the last question that
they have in mind.
Mr. Jenkins, have you anything to say or any questions to ask at
this time?
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, as far as I know I have heretofore
asked my last question. I have no further questions, certainly, at
this time.
Senator Mundt. Very well. The Chair will pass his first turn, and
we start, then, with Senator McClellan. Senator McClellan has 10
minutes under our committee rule of 10 minutes on each go-around.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH R. McCAETEY, A UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN— Resumed
Senator McClellan. Senator McCarthy, when you were on the
stand some 2 or 3 days ago
Senator McCarthy. I don't think your mike is turned on, Senator.
I can't hear you.
Senator McClellan. Is it all right now? Can you hear me now?
Senator McCarthy. That is better.
Senator McClellan. We were on this document of charges and
countercharges when I was interrogating you before. I did not want
to unduly delay the proceedings by probably going into every detail
and every charge as thoroughly as I have in other instances, but I
do want to question you about some of them.
Senator INIcCarthy. Senator, just so w^e both can use the same terms,
if you don't mind, I wonder if you couldn't refer to these as the
answer. We made no charges. We made an answer to the charges
made against us.
Senator INIcClellan. Well, Senator, may I say you interpret it
any way you like. To me they are charges. I couldn't interpret them
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2813
as beino; anything else, except countercharges. If you have some
other interpretation you want to use, that, of course, is your privilege,
and the great jury, as you refer to it, shall have to be the judge. I
cannot interpret it as anything but countercharges.
Senator McCarthy. The thing I — strike that.
Senator McClellan. I will start — I don't recall just Avhere we
ended before, but I w^ill start on page 2 of this mimeographed copy
that I have. The last sentence in item 3, or charge 3, reads :
They should further be instructed to tell the subcommittee once and for
all who is pulling the strings to protect those who, in turn, have protected
fifth-amendment Communists.
Senator LIcCartht. I follow you. What is your question, there,
Senator ?
Senator McClellan. I only read that last sentence.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator McClellan. Is it your belief now and was it your belief
then, that "they," referring to Secretary Stevens and Mr. Adams,
knew who was pulling the strings to protect those who in turn have
protected fifth amendment Communists ?
Senator ^McCarthy. Senator, I know that somebody has apparently
become panicky when it appeared that we were going to get the indi-
viduals who were in turn protecting Communists, sending them back
to the radar plants. May I emphasize at the time this was drafted, I
did not know that my good friend from Missouri, Senator Symington,
had procured legal counsel for Mr. Stevens. I didn't know that Mr.
Clark Clifford, the adviser of — perhaps not your wing of the party,
Senator McClellan, I don't know — the adviser to Mr. Truman, was
advising Mr. Stevens. But certainly someone got terribly disturbed
when it appeared that we w^ere going to get the loyalty board before
us, when we were going to get those who gave Peress, fifth amend-
ment Communists, special considerations.
Senator McClellan. Senator, maybe the President of the United
States is not of your wing of the party, either, I don't know. So w'e
will not argue about that.
Senator McCarthy. I
Senator McClellan. I did want
Senator McCarthy. Let me say there, I campaigned for the Presi-
dent, and I still would.
Senator McClellan. I haven't campaigned for Mr. Clifford yet, so
you are one up on me.
May I inquire, you referred to Mr. Clifford again. I think we
just as well determine, once and for all, the only time any evidence
appeared in this case that Mr. Clifford had anything to do Avith it was
about the 20th, 21st or 22d of January ; is that true ? Or in February ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall the dates. There is no sworn
testimony. All we have are the monitored telephone calls of Mr.
Symington, which indicate beyond any doubt that Mr. Clark Clifford
was advising Mr. Bob Stevens.
The monitored calls show that Stevens was willing to come and
testify, was willing to give us the information, but apparently Mr.
Clifford as a legal adviser, or something, prevailed.
Senator McClellan. Let us settle that now. Do you charge that
Mr. Clark Clifford is responsible for this mess 2
2814 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator ^IcCaetiiy. I don't charge anyone. All I do is call atten-
tion to the testimony.
Senator McClellan. We are all familiar with that.
Senator McCarthy-. I wonder if we are.
Senator McClellan. I think so. I know I am.
Senator McCarthy. The testimony shows ^
Senator McClellan. I thought you said it was ]ust the monitored
calls ; that we had no testimony. .-,,,,.. „ m
Senator McCarthy. Strike that when I said "testimony. Ihe
monitored calls show that, No. 1, Mr. Symington, I believe, on the
occasion of the first call referred to getting ahold of Clifford, referred
subsequently to discussion with "our legal friend," later than that
talked about the advice that was given apparently by Clifford, bo,
readino- those monitored calls, Senator, I don't think you can escape
the conclusion tliat Clark Clifford, the chief legal or chief political
adviser of President Truman, while I was attempting to dig out the
Communists, was brought in somehow so that he was the adviser ot
Mr. Stevens also. ,.,.., , • p i • £ ^.-i
Senator McClellan. Who do you think is the chief adviser of the
Attorney General of the United States ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know.
Senator McClellan. Beg your pardon?
Senator McCarthy. I say I don't know. -o ^ i ^5
Senator McClellan. You don't know. Neither do I. But let s
get back to the question.
Did vou have in mind at that time and did you believe and do you
now believe that they, Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams, knew who was
protecting those who in turn have protected fifth-amendment Com-
m musts
Senator McCarthy. Senator McClellan, I am not sure whether or
not they knew. They did know that there was a loyalty or a screening
board which they disbanded during our hearings, which had been
sending individuals with very bad Communist records back to the
secret radar plants. , j- j u
Senator McClellan. "Understand, I am not saying they didn t
know I am trying to determine if this is a charge that you made
that they knew it. Only you can answer it, except from the implica-
tion of the language used. t ^ jj-
Senator McCarthy. Let me make this very clear. Senator. _ i clon t
know what Secretary Stevens, in the short time he was m oflice,
learned. I do know that we learned with Mr. Adams present-his
iob was to report to Mr. Stevens— that consistently people with Com-
munist records had been removed from the radar plaiits; that even
after they were found unfit by the First Army Loyalty Board, almost
without exception when they got to the Pentagon to the old Iruman
Board they were sent back to work in the radar laboratories.
The figure we have is 33 out of 35. That is unofficial, because
Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams took the position that they could not
officially give us any figure. _ , . ., ,
Senator McClellan. Is it your contention that those who were
removed or suspended and who have been reinstated are still Com-
munists and subversives? Is that your contention?
Senator ^IcCarthy. Let's say subversives. I think when the com-
manding officer at the radar laboratories knew the man, when the
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2815
First Army Loyalty Board found him unfit on grounds of loyalty
and security, that that was sufficient reason why he should not have
been ordered back to the radar laboratories.
I know that that action by the Pentaofon screening board in effect
resulted in inducing the commanding officer no longer to suspend.
Senator IMcClellan. Senator, I may agree with you about some of
these things.
Senator McCarthy. I think you and I would agree about most of
this.
Senator McClellajSt. I am not complaining about it. I am trying
to jDinpoint your charges here. If they are as serious as I have
regarded them, they certainly deserve to be looked into, and I think
that is what this hearing was for as much as anything else.
Since you made the charge, it is your document; I am trying to
inquire into the seriousness of them and your conviction that they
are true or untrue.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Senator, I am convinced that everything
in this answer, not a charge — we didn't start this thing — everything
in this answer, as far as I know, is true.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time is up.
Senator McClellan. My time gets up about the time I get warmed
up.
Senator Mundt. We will be back to you soon.
Senator Dirksen ? Senator Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. Senator McCarthy, I want to direct a few ques-
tions with reference to this now famous 214-page document which
came initially from the FBI and was sent to G-2 of the Army with
a copy, I believe, to G-2 of the Air Force.
I want to ask you the reason why you did not get in touch with
Secretary Stevens at the time this serious information came to your
attention — specifically, the information in the document with refer-
ence to Aaron Coleman. I am w^ondering. Was the reason that you
did not communicate the facts in the FBI document to Stevens, in the
spring, I believe, of 1953, when you received it, because you knew he
had personal knowledge of the facts contained in the document?
Was that one of the reasons ?
Senator McCarthy. Let me say, Senator Jackson, that I cannot
help but be somewhat amused when I find your side of the aisle, the
Democrats, first want to put me in jail for receiving the information,
and then you get so disturbed about how I used it. I used that infor-
mation as I felt it should be used. I knew that the security officers
in the military had all that information.
Let's not refer to that as an FBI document. That 214-page docu-
ment was a resume of a 15-page document, we learn now", with all
information deleted which might give the names of informants, which
might demonstrate any investigating technique, and that eort of thing.
Senator Jackson. Senator, in all fairness, the document, as you
read portions of it into the record — and I have not seen the docu-
ment— did it not
Senator McCartpiy. I think you should see it.
Senator Jackson. Did it not state — I am going to follow the view
of Mr. Hoover and Mr. Brownell on that part of it about what we
ought to see or ought not to see.
46620°— 54— pt. 68 2
2816 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. We don't have it from Hoover.
Senator Jackson. I beg your pardon. I believe Mr. Collier has
testified, has he not, in connection with the interview that he had
with Mr. Hoover, and he said that this information should not be
made public?
Senator McCarthy. No, Mr. Jackson. The decision was not made
by Mr. Hoover. The decision was made by Mr. Brownell or Mr.
Rogers, who, incidentally, was in on that famous January 21 meeting.
Senator Jackson. Is it not true that Mr. Collier testified in con-
nection with his interview with Mr. Hoover that it should not be made
public unless the Attorney General granted such approval, the At-
torney General being his superior ?
Senator McCarthy. That is the rule.
Senator Jackson. I mean isn't that the testimony ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Jackson — —
Senator Jackson. Isn't that the testimony ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, you and I know that that is the rule,
that J. Edgar Hoover always has taken the position that any informa-
tion they obtain will only be made public upon the orders of the
Attorney General.
Senator Jackson. Yes ; but isn't that the testimony in the hearing,
that Mr. Collier interviewed Mr. Hoover ? Mr. Collier then came back
and gave the information to the committee, and he testified that Mr.
Hoover was opposed to having it made public unless permission were
granted by the Attorney General. I think the record is quite clear
on that.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Jackson, the answer is "Yes, but." J.
Edgar Hoover as far as I know never authorizes the publication of
any material which they obtain. He always takes the position that
the Attorney General, who is his boss, must make that decision. Take,
for example
Senator Jackson. Let's not go into a lot of other extraneous matter.
Senator McCarthy. This is important, Senator. I don't like to take
too much of your time, but I think it is important here that we make
this clear to the people who are listening, and that is that J. Edgar
Hoover makes no decision insofar as the publication of any informa-
tion is concernfied. Take the Harry Dexter White case. Hoover had
been urging, reurging and reurging that something be done about that
case. It was only when Mr. Brownell made a speech on it, and his
veracity was questioned, that that information was made public. That
was not J. Edgar Hoover.
Senator Jackson. Well, Senator, you remember that one news-
paperman said that he called up Mr. iSoover and wanted to know if
he could put it in his column and ho was advised by Mr. Hoover, ac-
cording to tlie report in the paper, that if he did, he would be arrested
immediately.
Senator McCarthy. I didn't read that report. _
Senator Jackson. Was the reason that you did not get in touch
with ISIr. Stevens because you felt that he had personal knowledge of
this situation?
Senator McCartjiy. Mr. Jackson, this was just one part, one piece
of evidence, and I have
Senator Jackson. It is pretty serious evidence.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIOlSr 2817
Senator McCarthy. And I have been firmly convinced all along
that all those in a position of security, let's call it that, knew even much
more than we did about this situation. I gave you the dates of other
documents, other FBI reports that went down, in which apparently
they urged as strongly as in this particular document.
Senator Jackson. Senator, my question was, Did you not get in
touch with Mr. Stevens because you felt that he had personal knowl-
edge. That is what I am talking about, not what they had in G-2, but
because Stevens had personal knowledge of this situation?
Senator McCarthy. I was in touch with Mr. Stevens.
Senator Jackson. But I say, why didn't you get in touch with Mr.
Stevens ? Was it because you felt that he already had this information ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Jackson, I tried to give Mr. Stevens a,t all
times a complete picture of the situation as it was. Mr. Stevens knew
how badly disturbed I was, not only about this situation
Senator Jackson. Did he know at this time ?
Senator McCarthy. Not only about this situation at Fort Mon-
mouth, but other situations.
Senator Jackson. Senator McCarthy, I am referring, of course, to
the time when you first learned of this information back, I believe, let's
say April-May, you said the spring, I think, or April, when you re-
ceived this alarming information, particularly with reference to Aaron
Coleman. Did you then get in touch with Mr. Stevens ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Jackson. Did you not get in touch with him because you
felt that he had the information anyway, personal knowledge of it?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Jackson. Well, was it because you didn't feel that it was
much use in getting in touch with him ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Jackson. Didn't you feel that here is a new man in as
Secretary of the Army, a new team going in, so to speak, they couldn't
learn everything about it immediately, that if the situation was as
represented in the documents, in this document, that time was of the
essence and you should get in touch with him immediately ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Jackson. Well, isn't it quite obvious that the most im-
portant thing in a situation such as this, where you have informa-
tion that an individual worked at Monmouth was in touch with
Russian espionage agents, that that information should be conveyed
immediately so that such people could be removed at once?
Senator McCarthy. That information was in the hands of all
those responsible.
Senator Jackson. But the Secretary of the Army is responsible.
Senator McCarthy. You see, Mr, Jackson, .you are talking now
about one piece of information. During the course — and I think
you know this — during the course of our investigation. Senator, we
receive information every day about various departments. My task,
if I were to get on the phone each time I received information — for
example, about the CIA, about the Atomic Energy, about the Army
War College, about the indoctrination courses, about Communist
speakers, or, rather. Communist-liners speaking to Army men — if I
"Were to get on the phone each time I received a report, I would be
2818 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
on the phone all cla^^ long. What I do, Mr. Jackson, when I know
that a piece of information is in the files of Army intelligence, I know
that those who are charged with getting rid of Commnnists have that
information, over a long period of time, it would be worse than silly
for me to call them up and say, "Don't you know it is in j^our files?"
Senator Jackson. Senator, Mr. Stevens had only been in office a
couple of months, and there are thousands of documents in the files
of G-2. Now, isn't the real thing at issue here getting these alleged
subversives out of the Government ? Isn't that the real objective ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Senator Jackson.
Senator Jackson. And getting them out at once?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Senator Jackson. But one day, you see,
you want to send me to jail for getting this information, and the next
day
Senator Jackson. Wait a minute, Senator.
Senator ]\IcCarthy. The next day you shout — let me finish.
Senator Jackson. No, no, wait a minute. Let me ask you to point
to any place in the record. Senator, where I said I was going to send
you to jail. Point that out.
Senator IMcCarthy. You may have a good point there.
Senator Jackson. Why do you say those thnigs that you know are
not in the record ?
Senator McCarthy. Why don't you wait until I answer ?
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired. You may answer
the question unless Senator Jackson would rather resume this on a
new 10-minute go-around.
Senator IMcCarthy. If I don't answer it to Senator Jackson's
satisfaction, he should have a choice for another question. The senior
member of the Democrat
Senator Jackson. I am referring to my specific question.
Senator McCarthy. Wait a minute. We have all the time in the
Avorld here. The senior member of the Democratic Party, Senator
McClellan, not only here on the stand but in speeches, and I am not
criticizing him for it, he has a right to say what he wants to, has inti-
mated that because I received information about Communists in the
radar plants, that there is something illegal about that, that there was
some crime. So I must say I can't help but be somewhat amused when
I find my Democrat friends over here one day saying that the Attorney
General should try and get me indicted for getting information about
Communists, and the next day saying I didn't handle that information
properly. I handled it as best we could. We handled it so that in
the end, the end result was that some 35 people with Communist
records who were handling radar material at the time we got this
document are no longer handling secret radar material. Now, that
is as best I can do it. May I say. Senator
Senator Jackson. Senator, after all that statement, you haven't
answered my question. It is all right, go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. I am only one man. If my three Democrat
friends hadn't left the committee, if they had worked with me, maybe
we could have accomj)lished more.
Senator Jackson. Apparently we were right. Senator, because you
turned around and granted all the concessions which were the basis
for our k>aviiig. If we were wrong in leaving, why did you turn
around and ask that all the rules be changed?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2819
Senator jMcCartiiy. I think I made a mistake in trying to get you
to come back.
Senator Jackson. You are admitting you made a mistake?
Senator JMcCartiiy. Because we have done very little work aside
from investigating our staffs.
Senator Jackson. That is because you created a situation that
caused all this trouble. It all happened while we Avere off the com-
mittee, or somebody caused it. We were not on the committee, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. May I answer Senator Jackson ?
Senator Mundt. No ; that question is ruled out for the time being.
Senator Jackson. That was a statement, not a question.
Senator Mundt. The question was recorded. We do not need to
record the answer now. You may answer the next time we go around.
Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, before asking any questions of
Senator McCarthy, I would like to make a short statement.
Monday I asked Mr. Carr a series of questions about security meas-
ures with respect to the files of this subcommittee. I was simply
asking for information, and I so stated at that time. I was distressed,
however, to hear Mr. Carr describe the security situation with respect
to the files of our committee, and also to the reaction to my questions
of Senator McCarthy.
Mr. Chairman, each member of this subcommittee. Republican and
Democrat alike, has responsibility to the people of the United States,
both in law and in fact, to safeguard any classified information which
rests in the files of this committee.
Each member of the committee is equally responsible for the mem-
bers of the staff of the committee. In fact, as you will recall, the
Democrats only returned to this committee after it was agreed they
could and should share responsibility for all staff members.
Therefore, I now demand that before the end of the day, the Depart-
ment of Defense, which as of now has various representatives in this
room, report to this committee as to each of the members of the staff
of this committee, whether legal, investigative, secretarial, or adminis-
trative, for whom a Defense Department clearance has been requested,
with the date of such request; and each staff member for whom such
clearance has been granted, with the date of such granting; and each
such staff member for wdiom such clearance has been denied, with the
date of such refusal.
I want it clearly understood, Mr. Chairman, that I am making no
accusations whatever. However, I feel it important to the Nation's
security that this requested information be forwarded to this com-
mittee before these hearings are terminated. I also request that this
information be given this committee in executive session.
I do not now and I never have made any accusations that any in-
dividual was a security risk on the basis of any trivial charge. And I
do not want to be a party to any public accusations against defense-
less persons, such as we have witnessed on occasions in these hearings.
However, the investigators and other staff members have had and
will have access to matters affecting the security of the United States
in the course of past and future investigations by this committee.
It is therefore of the highest importance that this committee do all
in its power to make sure that no weak security link can be found in its
own staff.
2820 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Senator if he has a copy
of what he has read so that I could instruct the Department of Defense ?
Senator Symington. I have, Mr. Welch, and I am glad to pass it
to you.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Senator a few questions.
Senator McCarthy, may I read to you from a portion of your cross-
examination of Secretary Stevens on April 30, page 1335 of the record ?
Senator McCarthy. Would you hold that a minute. Senator, until
I get that; 1335.
Senator Mundt. Time out while the witness is getting the testimony.
Senator INIcCap.thy. I don't question your ability to read. I think
you have been doing a very good job.
Senator Symington. Senator, you have mentioned that several
times, and I would like you to know that I wrote this memorandum.
If you would get the deputy junior Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. Cohn,
out of your ear, I think you could hear me better sometimes.
Senator McCarthy. May I say if we were to have a deputy junior
Senator, I couldn't think of anyone whom I would rather have than
Mr. Cohn as the deputy junior Senator.
Make no mistake about it, I think Mr. Cohn is one of the most
valuable men I have ever had with any committee — period.
Now what page were you reading from. Senator?
Senator Symington. Page 1335 of the record.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator Symington. Are we set?
Senator McCarthy. All set.
Senator Mundt. Time back in.
Senator Symington (reading) :
Senator McCarthy. Well, all right, now, what is espionage in your vocabulary?
Secretai-y Stevens. Spying.
Senato- McCaiithy. If a man gives away a secret, that would be a violation of
the Espionage Act, would it not?
Secretary Stevens. You would Ijnow about that. I assume that would be
correct.
Senator McCarthy. Well, Robert, you are the Secretary of the Army.
Secretary Steven?. That is right.
Senator JMcCarthy. Well, now, if a man or if an employee of the Army gave
an unauthorized person secret, top secret, or confidential material, that would
be a violation of the Espionage Act?
Secretary Stevens. You are familiar with that. I assume that it would
be, Senator, and it certainly sounds so.
Have I read that right?
Senator INIcCartiiy. You have read that excellently.
Senator Symington. Senator INIcCarthy, as I see it, based on your
own words, if a man or if an employee of the Army gave an unau-
thorized person secret, top secret, or confidential material, would that
be a violation of the Espionage Act ?
Senator McCarthy. An unauthorized person, yes. I believe, Sen-
ator, however, to get a conviction for a violation of the Espionage Act,
the information w^ould have to be of such a nature that it would be of
benefit to an enemy. But essentially, I think that you are correct in
that.
Senator Symington. Thank you. That act, as I read it, makes it
a felony punishable by a fine up to $10,000 and by a jail sentence of up
to 10 years for any person having control of classified documents who
divulge them to an unauthorized person; is that correct?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2821
Senator McCarthy. You are speaking about the McCarran Act.
I think that is the penalty provided in the McCarran Act, an excellent
act.
Senator Symington. United States Code, Annotated, Title XVIII,
Crime and Criminal Procedures, 701-1698, paragraph 793.
Senator McCarthy. You are a bit beyond my depth. I don't have
the number.
Senator Symington. That is just for the record.
As I understand that act, it also makes it illegal for any unauthorized
person to retain any such unauthorized information without delivering
it to the officer of the Government entitled to receive it. Is that
correct ?
Senator McCarthy. I think you read that incorrectly. Senator.
Wlien you said "authorized person," you meant "unauthorized per-
son."
Senator Symington. Is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. I think that is the act.
Senator Symington. You were present, were you not, when Mr.
Collier testified about the 2i/4-page document purported to have been
signed by Mr. Hoover ?
Senator McCarthy. I was present when Mr. Collier testified.
Senator Symington. Mr. Collier testified, didn't he, that the 2i^-
page document was marked "Personal and Confidential via Liai-
son"
Senator McCarthy. I would rather let his testimony speak for itself.
As I recall, that is substantially what he testified to.
Senator Symington. May I finish my c^uestion ?
Senator McCarthy. I am sorry.
Senator Symington. Mr. Collier testified, did he not, that the 234-
page document was marked "Personal and Confidential via Liaison,"
and that the FBI original memorandum was also marked "Confidential
via Liaison" ?
Senator McCarthy. If you say that was his testimony, I would
agree.
Senator Symington. That is the way I understand it, Senator.
Therefore, there could be no doubt in the minds of anyone who saw
these documents that they contained confidential information which
by law could not be given to any unauthorized person, is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. Any unauthorized person, yes.
Senator Symington. Right.
You have testified, haven't you, that your informer — I will not ask
you to name him — was a young person employed by or serving in the
Army ?
Senator McCarthy. I believe that was my testimony.
Senator Symington. He gave this 214-page document to you ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, an authorized chairman of an investi-
gating committee.
Senator Symington. If you are a person authorized to receive this
document under the law there is no violation of the law. If you are
not authorized to receive the document it is a violation. It is as
simple as that ; is it not ?
Senator McCarthy. No, it isn't as simple as that.
No. 1, I am_ authorized to receive — not only authorized but I have
a duty to receive any evidence — let me finish.
2822 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Symington. I don't think you heard my question. May I
reread the question to you ?
Senator McCarthy. No, Senator, this is the whole meat of this
case when you get into the question of secrecy versus giving the Amer-
ican people the facts.
The chairman of an investigating committee has the duty to get evi-
dence of wrongdoing. Everyone in the Government under the law
has the right and the duty to give information to the chairman of an
investigating committee, and when you have, as you have here, the
FBI doing just as thorough a job as they did in the Harry Dexter
White case, I believe, warning day after day after day that men with
Communist records were in the secret radar laboratories, I believe
that there was no choice on the part of anyone who knew that informa-
tion but to give that to the chairman of some committee who would
use it.
Senator Symington. Will the reporter repeat my question and then
repeat the answer?
Senator Mundt. Do you want the whole question and answer?
Senator Symington. Yes.
Senator Mundt. All right, read the question and read the answer.
(The reporter read from his notes as requested.)
Senator McCarthy. In view of the fact that the Senator's time has
expired, I would like to pass to him, and he may want to have this
for his information, the La Follette Act which provides that people
in the civil service have the right to give Members of Congress in-
formation.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. I would like to ask for some assistance. I am in-
formed by Colonel Murray, in respect to Senator Symington's request,
that the job at the Defense Department would be much simplified
if we could have a list of the names of the current employees on the
Senator's staff, and if somebody can give instructions to give us those
names promptly we can be more swift in obeying the command, or at
least the suggestion, of Senator Symington.
Senator McCarthy. There will be no objection at all.
Mr. Welch. Would someone at your desk. Senator, or behind your
desk, see that that is started at once ?
Senator McCarthy. Will you take care of that ?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Anastos will provide the list.
Mr, Colin, you have 10 minutes if you want to ask your client any
questions.
Mr. CoiiN. No, sir.
Senator Mundt. All riglit. He passes.
Mr. Welch or Mr. St. Clair, you have 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Senator, I was interested in the matter that Senator
Jackson opened with you and I may
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, will you pardon me just a minute; I
had agreed to announce that Senator Jackson was called away from
the committee table to attend a meeting, where they are having a vote
in the Public Works Committee.
Mv. Welch. Curiously enough, I hadn't noticed that he had gone.
Senator Mundt. That will not be taken out of your time.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2823
Mr. Welch. You recall telling ns, Senator, that you got that 214-
page document some time, presumably in April or May of 1953?
Senator McCakthy. I think that is correct.
Mr. Welch. And it was dated back several months, was it not?
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall the date.
Mr. Welch. Well, it was a 1951 document, was it not?
Senator McCarthy. I think it was dated some time in 1951.
Mr. Welch. Yes.
Now, of course you knew when that document came — strike that
out. And I think you told the Senator that when that document
came into your possession, you were much disturbed.
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall my testimony, but I certainly was
concerned about it.
Mr. Welch. I think you used the word "disturbed" ?
Senator McCarthy. I may have used that word.
Mr. Welch, And is that accurate, that you were disturbed ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I am always disturbed when I hear about
Communists in Government.
Mr. Welch. And on this one, you knew enough about Monmouth
even then, to know that this was disturbing news, didn't you ?
Senator McCarthy. That was disturbing news.
Mr. Welch. You also knew, Senator, that Mr. Stevens was a brand-
new Secretary of the Army, didn't you ?
Senator McCarthy. AVell, he had been recently appointed, I believe.
Mr. Welch. That is right. And you have heard him testify here
that one of the very first acts that he did on taking office was to investi-
gate a review or a review, let us say, of the security situation through-
out the Army ?
Senator McCarthy. No ; I think what he said was that he asked the
FBI to conduct an investigation
Mr. Welch. That Avas on April 10, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Which was, of course, completely unnecessary,
because he had sufficient information with which to act. No. 1. And
No. 2, it is the job of Army Intelligence. They have the information.
Mr. Welch. Well, even
Senator McCarthy. It would be just a waste of time.
Mr. Welch. It was not until April 10, Senator, that he asked the
FBI to make an investigation. Do you recall that testimony ?
Senator McCarthy. I believe that was his testimony.
Mr. Welch. Whether it is necessary nor not, it is always a very
wonderful idea, if you are disturbed about security or safety, to have
the FBI go in, is it not ?
Senator McCarthy. I think that the calling in of the FBI, when
you have sufficient information upon which to act, when you know
what the facts are, it is all in the file, is a great waste of time and
effort. There was sufficient information in the files on April 10 to
suspend all those who were suspended after our hearings were called.
Mr. Welch. Now, I am directing your attention to another piece
of evidence, and that is that almost instantly on taking office. Secre-
tary Stevens sent for the appropriate officers and demanded a brief-
ing on the security situation so that he could be sure he could get the
•wheels going under his administration to do everything possible to
46620°— 54— pt. 68 3
2824 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
protect the Army and the country in that area. Do you remember he
so testified ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall the particular testimony. If
you say he so testified, I will accept that.
INIr. Welch. Right.
Now, to go back to your word "disturbed," you were, I think you
have agreed with me, the moment you say the 2i/4-page document,
you were disturbed, is that right?
Senator McCarthy. Yes ; I say I am always disturbed when I hear
about Communists in Government.
Mr, Welch. And you were disturbed for the safety of the country ?
Senator McCarthy. I think there is no question about that.
Mr. Welch. And you knew from the date on that document that
it had been in the files of the Army for some time, did you not ?
Senator McCarthy. It apparently had been.
]\Ir. Welch. And you certainly knew enough
Senator McCarthy. Just so we have the record straight, we talk
about that document, the document which I received, you understand,
was a resume, apparently, according to the testimony here, of an FBI
report.
Now, whether that resume was made and circulated to various
departments or not, or whether the original document was circulated,
at this time I frankly don't know.
Mr. Welch. You knew, of course, that when Secretary Stevens
became Secretary of the Army, that he had a multitude of duties to
perform, didn't you?
Senator McCarthy. He had a great number of duties.
Mr. AVelch. And you knew, as someone familiar with Washington,
that it was just incredible that he would be able to acquaint himself
with the files quickly?
Senator McCarthy. He has a great number of men who are given
that job. The Secretary is the administrator, in effect; he has got
individuals to do the job.
Mr. Welch. But you, Senator, as soon as you saw that document,
and as soon as you were disturbed by it, were in a position where,
by the use of the telephone alone, you could have said to Mr. Stevens,
"Mr. Secretary, I don't know how busy you are down there, or how
much you got to do, but I have some information about possible
subversives at Fort Monmouth, and I think you ought to have it."
You could have done that, couldn't you ?
Senator McCarthy. I could have called the Secretary? Certainly,
I could have called him.
Mr. Welch. Right, or you could have gone and seen him.
Senator McCarthy. I could have gone and seen him or I could have
called him; yes.
Mr. Welch. And either one of those would have been a simple,
courteous gesture on your part, would it not ?
Senator McCarthy. It would have been very, very simple.
Mr. Welch. And a courteous gesture?
Senator McCarthy. As far as courteous is concerned, the point is
that after the information was given to the Secretary and Mr. Adams,
it took our hearings, it took public hearings, to get rid of these indi-
viduals. Tliere were no secrets kept from the Secretary. Mr. Adams
was allowed to sit in on every executive session. He was given all the
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2825
information we had. It Avas only after our hearings were held or the
investigation was started, that there were suspensions.
Mr. Welch. Senator, I am talking about April or May
Senator McCarthy. I know what you are talking about.
Mr. Welch. "Wlien you are disturbed about the situation at Mon-
mouth. You remember what I am talking about, do you not ? April
or May
Senator McCarthy. You are talking about April or May. Go
ahead.
Mr. Welch. Yes, when you were disturbed about the situation at
Momnouth ?
Senator McCarthy. And disturbed by many other situations, too.
Mr. Welch. Yes, but you were disturbed about that one, weren't
you?
Senator McCarthy. There is no question about that.
Mr. Welch. Right, and I am saying to you that it would have been
a simple and let's say a patriotic gesture to say to this new Secretary
of the Army, "]\Ir. Secretary, there is something at Monmouth you
may not know about that has got me disturbed and I want you to know
about it," you could have said that, couldn't you have, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I could have talked to the Secretary.
Mr. Welch. And we could have been months, weeks and months,
ahead of the time that we were when the hearings commenced about
doing something about Monmouth?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Welch. Don't you know. Senator, that if the Secretary of the
Navy knows there is — strike it out. If the Secretary of the Army
knows that there is a security risk anywhere, he can be put under sur-
veillance the moment he knows it ? Do you know that, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch
Mr. Welch. Would you listen to the question? Do you know that
the Secretary of the Army can put any suspected subversive under
surveillance the moment he knows his name ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, to show how wrong you are, this
Fifth Amendment Communist Peress was promoted, given an honor-
able discharge, favorable, plush duty. We have been trying for
months and months to get from the Secretary the names of those who
were responsible. I hope sooner or later we will get those names. You
try to create the impression that all I have got to do is call up the head
of a bureau and tell him there is something wrong in his department.
That is not my task. I do not keep any secrets from the various de-
partments. I have found over the past number of years that it is a
great waste of time to try and urge a house cleaning among the heads
of the various departments, that the only way that we can accomplish
anything is by letting the American people know what is happening.
Then we can force an action.
Now, as of this moment, keep in mind, Mr. Welch, we are still try-
ing to get the names of that old Truman loyalty board who sent men
with Communist records, men who had been found unfit to serve in
the radar laboratories, sent them back to Fort Monmouth.
Now you are trying to create the impression that I can merely call
up and say, "There is something wrong here now."
What I do, or try to do, is give the American jDeople the facts, and
I intend to keep on doing that, period.
2826 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. Mr. Reporter, would you be good enough to read the
Senator the question I just asked him; and would you listen to it as it
is read, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I always listen to you, Mr. Welch.
Senator Mundt. The reporter will read the question.
(Whereupon, the question was read by the reporter as above re-
corded.)
Mr. Welch. Did you hear that question. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I heard the question.
Mr. Welch. Do you know that the Secretary of the Army can put
any suspected subversive under surveillance the moment he knows his
name ?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has expired. The witness
may answer the question.
Senator McCarthy. The question is whether or not the Secretary
can put a man under surveillance. He would have to testify as to
that.
Mr. Welch. I didn't hear your answer.
Senator McCarthy. The question is whether or not the Secretary
can put a man under surveillance. I say the Secretary would have
to answer as to that.
Mr. Welch. Go ahead.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins?
Mr. Jenkins. I pass.
Senator ]\Iundt. The Chair has a few questions.
I would like to say that over the weekend and during the 2 days
that Mr. Carr was testifying, the Chair has gone through these various
documents, specifications, charges, countercharges, and statements of
fact, and as much of the testimony previously given by Senator Mc-
Carthy as he could, trying to find out if we had overlooked any phases
or questions which should be cleaned up. I am aware of the fact that
Senator McClellan is going to follow his customary practice that he
has followed through the hearings, of taking the so-called McCarthy-
Carr-Cohn document and interrogating Senator McCarthy about that
as he has interrogated the other witnesses.
I have at least 2 points, possibly 3 or 4 points, of the other side of
the specifications, signed by Joseph N. Welch, on behalf of Adams
and Stevens, dated April 13.
Do you have a copy of that before you. Senator McCarthy ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes; I have. Senator.
Senator Mundt. Will you turn to page 3. I believe that there is
already testimony in the record about your version or your answer to
the charge starting at the bottom of page 2, No. 8, in which it is alleged
that on November G, McCarthy, Mr. Cohn, and Mr. Carr sought to
arrange an assignment for Dave Schine which would enable him to
check on the textbooks at West Point. Have you been asked a ques-
tion about that? I think that specific thing has been covered, but
I am not sure, and I would like to have your testimony on it.
Senator McCarthy. That has been covered. I will be glad to do
it again. Senator.
Senator Mundt. If you will do that briefly, the West Point feature,
particularly.
Senator McCarthy. May I say that the West Point phase of this
was the least important. We had information and complaints that
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2827
Commimist-line books were being used to indoctrinate the military,
especially intelligence; that they are being used in the Army War
College; some reports about West Point, although I have received
very little concrete information with regard to West Point, I must
admit.
The Secretary discussed it with me. I think the date was the 14th
of January — at least it was the day before he went to the Far East —
when he came over to the Carroll Arms Hotel. We had just a general
discussion about what could be done about this subject, the difficulty
of the committee's going into it, whether or not that would not be a
job that he could do himself.
Senator Mundt. To shorten
Senator McCarthy. He discussed Schine in that connection.
Senator Mundt. Is it your testimony that Secretary Stevens
brought up the matter of an assignment or Schine, or that it was a
suggestion made on the part of the three of you that Schine be as-
signed to that work ?
Senator McCarthy. Secretary Stevens — may I say that Mr. Cohn
and Mr. Carr were not present that day. May I say, Mr. Chairman,
just to have this
Senator Mundt. I believe we are talking about a different date,
Senator McCarthy. This date, I think, is November 6.
Senator McCarthy. November 6. Senator, I don't recall- —
Senator Mundt. It is their specification No. 8, starting at the bot-
tom of page 2. You were talking about the Carroll Arms.
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator Mundt. I believe November 6 was a luncheon in the office
of Secretary Stevens.
Senator McCarthy. I recall very little conversation about Mr.
Schine on that day. The meat of the conversation that day had to
do with whether or not we would call off the hearings on Communist
infiltration in the military.
Senator Mundt. Put it that way, since there is some confusion
about the dates. Did at any time you or, to your knowledge, Mr. Cohn
suggest that Schine be relieved of his military duties for purpose of
making a study of pro-Communist textbooks in the Army ?
Senator McCarthy. No, but in fairness to Mr. Stevens, let me say
this : That Mr. Stevens and I discussed on a number of occasions — I
recall specifically the Carroll Arms Hotel meeting — the problem of
Communist textbooks being used, indoctrination material in indoc-
trination courses, stuff at the Army War College. We discussed the
wisdom of his getting a team of competent people to make a study of
that subject.
He mentioned the fact that he had very
Senator Mundt. In other words, the subject was discussed, but it
is your testimony that it was discussed at a time when the item was
initiated by Secretary Stevens and that no effort was made on your
part to get Schine assigned for that duty l
Senator McCarthy. None whatsoever.
Senator Mundt. That is your testimony. I wanted that as back-
ground for the last line of that charge, if you will look at the top
of page 3, because I think no question has been asked about this.
2828 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
In Mr. Welch's specifications it says :
These requests were coupled with promises reasonably to limit or to terminate
the subcommittee hearings on Fort Monmouth.
I want to find out, What promises did you or Mr. Carr or Mr. Cohn
make, individually or collectively, to limit or terminate the subcom-
mittee hearings ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, there was never any promise
made of any kind. We made it very clear to the chairman and Mr.
Adams that Mr. Schine had nothing whatsoever to do with calling
these hearings on or calling them off. ]\Ir. Schine's induction in no
way affected in one iota the investigation of Communists in the
military.
Senator Mundt. So it would be your testimony that this statement
in Mr. Welch's specifications that these requests were coupled with
promises reasonably to limit or to terminate subcommittee hearings on
Fort Monmouth is an inaccurate statement?
Senator McCarthy. Completely false, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Both as to limitation of hearings and as to termi-
nation of hearings ?
Senator McCarthy. Completely false.
I might say, Mr, Chairman, I think it very insulting to intimate
that either my staff or I would call off exposure of traitors in order
to get a favor for some private in the Arm3^ No. 1, the hearings were
never called off until they filed these charges. That resulted in their
being called off. No. 2, according to General Kyan, Schine never got
any favors.
Senator Mundt. To the best of my recollection, there had been no
questions about that particular sentence in the specifications. It
seems to deal with the same general subject matter as the press state-
ment Avhich was never issued from Fort Monmouth, but it refers to
a different occasion.
You are quite sure that no such promise or implication of promise
was made ?
Senator jNIcCarthy. Very definitely, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Now turn to page 4 of the Welch specifications,
item 14. There is this statement, the last statement in the paragraph :
Private Schine was absent from Fort Dix on such special passes on occasions
when in fact he did no work on behalf of this subcommittee.
Is there testimony in the record, is there information available to
you, to prove that Mr. Schine was absent on occasions when he did
no work for the subcommittee?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, this is just another of those
statements which have fallen for lack of proof. There has been no
proof on the part of either Mr. Stevens or Mr. Adams or Mr. Welch
that this is true.
Senator Mundt. The Chair has looked through the record, trying
to find that. It is entirely possible, of course, that Mr. Welch, during
the course of his interrogatories, while these hearings are still in
progress, may introduce such evidence. But the Chair was concerned
because he could not remember any specific testimony under oath as
to occasions when Private Schine was absent on special passes, when
it was proved that he was not working on behalf of the subcommittee.
And if there is such evidence available, I think it would be very
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2829
pertinent to this case. At least, it would be pertinent from the stand-
point of whether or not the Army had been granting him preferential
treatment, or whether or not he had deceptively been able to get passes
in order to deceive the Army. So, if there is evidence available, I
think that that should be introduced during the course of the hearings.
Senator McCarthy. I agree with the Chair.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan, you have 10 minutes.
Senator McClellan. Senator McCarthy, during the course of these
hearings, I have tried to be impartial and impersonal in the perform-
ance of my duties. I hope I have succeeded, and I shall continue to
try to do that. You made a statement a while ago that I had made
some statement in a speech about your being put in jail and being
indicted. Do you have any evidence of that?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Symington, I questioned you
Senator Symington. Let's get the names straight, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. In the record. I think I can quote you right
here. Page 3914. Do you want a copy of that. Senator ?
Senator McClellan. I don't need it.
Senator McCarthy. I say ;
Unless I misunderstood you, Senator, the other day when I took the stand,
the question arose as to whether or not I should give out the name of this
young man who gave me the resume of the FBI files. Now I read a story in the
paper about 2 or 3 days later, and again I certainly don't hold you responsible
for news reports.
At that time, you interrupted me and said :
Have I ever given out any information of this committee?
I said :
Let me finish. Your statement as it was quoted was to the effect that you
thought perhaps not only the man who gave me this information about Com-
munists, but also Senator McCarthy might be guilty of a crime.
Senator McClellan. I repeat that statement, sir. I do not believe you can
receive information that is obtained by a criminal means and hold it in your
possession without the probability of you, too, being guilty of a crime.
And I say :
If anyone wants to indict me, they can go right ahead.
Senator McClellan says :
That is a matter of legal opinion. But this is not restricted information, if
you have the names, for the committee.
Senator McClellan. I asked you if I had made a speech.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I say that anyone reading that would
understand that you had taken the position No. 1, that this informa-
tion was obtained by criminal means, which was untrue, and No. 2,
that I was guilty of a crime for having taken it. I feel that is grossly
untrue. Senator. I have hopes, and as you know we worked together
very well for a great number of years, I have hoped that you might
correct that record. Because if it stands, in effect what it says,
Senator, I believe, and I think you will agree with me, in effect what
it says is that if the day comes that the Democrats take over the
Senate and McClellan becomes the chairman
Senator McClellan. That won't be long.
Senator McCarthy. That is entirely possible. That is entirely
possible. But it is a rather important point. In effect, you say that
no one can give me information about wrongdoing in Government
2830 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
if it is stamped with the stamp of secret, confidential, or restricted.
Now, Senator, may I say that I think you are grossly but honestly m
error If you are right. Senator, then it means that if I am m a ]ob
in the executive department, let's say in the Treasury Department,
if I embezzle fifty, one hundred thousand, or a half million dollars,
if I stamp all the document secret, top secret or confidential, it means
no one can ever tell the Congress about that. And I think that you
and I should be on the same side in this fight, Senator. I think you
and I should be on the side of attempting to give the American people
all the information, so long as it doesn't. No. 1, give out the names ol
iuiy informants, make piil)lic any investigative technique, or m no
way endangers the national security.
But I am sure. Senator, that you will agree with me that we have
o-one to a ridiculous point over the last number of years, m not worry-
fntr about information which will affect the national security, but,
rather, information which might afreet the security of some ]obholder
Senator McCi.rllan. Senator, you corrected the record. You said
a while ago I made a speech. Do you want to admit now that I
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I asked you about the speech, and
you said here, and I will repeat it . -, , ,5
Senator McClellan. Is that what you referred to as a speech^
Senator McCarthy. I said vour statement as it was noted -
Senator McClellan. Is it what you referred to as a speech?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. , , -r 1 i
Senator McClellan. All right. Let's stick to that. I asked you
about a sjieech. I have made no speeches, for your information, it
you don't know. ^104.
Senator McCarthy. Then it was a statement, apparently, Senator.
Senator McClellan. All right, let's get it into the record.
Senator McCarthy. Whether it is a speech here or not, I ask you
further , , ^ • ^r j -t.
Senator McCi.ellan. We know what the record is. 1 ou read it.
Senator McCarthy. Okay.
Senator McC'lellan. I thought I heard you make a speech here
yesterday, or statement, if you are referring to statements here as
speeches, about wanting to get this thing all worked out. Didn't you
make a pretty little speech yesterday afternoon about hoping tlie
time would come when the executive branch and legislative branch
could work this problem out so they could cooperate together ?
Senator McCarthy. I discussed that, and I still sincerely hope that
we can work it out together. . .
Senator McClellan. Do you challenge my position when 1 ask
for a ruling on it to determine? Did you not see your colleagues
on this committee refuse to touch that document in apprehension that
they would be doing something illegal and wrong? Did you not
witness that right in\hese proceedings?
Senator McCarthy. I think that is a correct statement. _ ^
Senator McClellan. That is a correct statement. Then is it not
the best course to pursue to try to get the question resolved through
legal and proper processes ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, you are right, but
Senator McClellan. Thank you.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2831
Senator ISIcCarthy. But, let me say that I felt, and I think every-
one who was watching you felt, that you were indicating that you
felt it would be wrong for an investigating committee to get any in-
formation that was stamped "Classified."
Now, if 3'ou are — if that was incorrect, I think that you should
correct the record now. Senator, because this can have a very serious
effect upon our ability to get information.
Senator McClellan. I don't think I am wrong. I want to say
this: I take the position that if the party who takes the document
is committing a theft, or violating the law, then I doubt that anyone
is authorized to receive it. And I think that should be cleared up.
As you indicated, I think very a))propriately so a moment ago, you
may not always be chairman of this committee. And I would want
to know that I was proceeding legally, in receiving such information.
That is the position that I have taken. I think you refer, maybe,
to the Justice Department or someone, I don't know who, as being
a stacked deck. I don't know whether it is stacked or not. If it is,
we should get it unstacked.
Senator jMcCartht. Could I have that copy of the law that I handed
to Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. Would you pass it back to me ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator McClellan. If your position is correct, all I want to do is
establish it as a fact so that we can all proceed accordingly and pro-
ceed within the law. If your position is incorrect, and the law should
be what you contend it is, then we ought to consider amending the
law or enacting a statute that will make this procedure legal.
That is all I am tryino- to do, Senator. I think you agree with me.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, may I say that the law is very clear.
Back in 1012 there was a hassle pretty much on the order of what
we have today. At that time, my predecessor, Senator Bob La Fol-
lette, Sr., introduced a bill which was passed. As far as I know, it
is still the law today. It provides that every individual in civil
service has the right to furnish "information to either House of
Congress or to any committee or member thereof," and that right shall
not be interfered Avith.
Senator McClellan. Does that not mean legal information ? That
doesn't refer to someone's taking a classified document and passing
it out?
Senator McCarthy. I think you are completely wrong, Senator.
1 don't think any Government employee can deny the people the right
to know what the facts are by using a rubber stamp and stamping
something "Secret."
Senator McClellan. This is a legal question.
Senator McCarthy. I don't think it is a close question at all. I
don't think it is even a close question.
Senator McClellan. You don't think it is close, but a lot of others
do. All I am trying to do is to get it in the proper perspective,
in the hope, if you are right, that your administration will sustain
you and we can get away from all this squabble and get down to a
procedure that we all recognize and acknowledge as being the law
of the land.
2g32 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
I was very apprehensive when I saw your colleagues here, and
the counsel which this committee has selected for these proceedings,
refuse to touch the document. It made me wonder then how we were
proceedinir, whether within the law, above the law, or beyond the law.
I think it'is very important, Senator. I agree with you that it ought
to be settled. That is all I am interested in.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, may I make it very clear so there is
no question about it : Regardless of who tries to sustain me or vice
versa, while I am chairman of the committee I will receive all the
information I can get about wrongdoing in the executive branch. I
will give that information to the American people.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired.
Senator McClellan. I understand that is your position.
Senator McCarthy. And I will protect anyone who gives me that
information.
Senator McClellan. I don't blame you for protecting anyone who
o^ives you information. That is not the question at issue. The ques-
tion is, the use of information and the procuring of information that
may constitute an illegal procurement of it. I think that is the issue
that I want settled, because when the Democrats get in I want to
proceed within the law.
Senator McCarthy. Can I answer the Senator's question ?
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired, and there will be
a long time to debate this before the Democrats get in.
Senator Dirksen ?
Senator McCarthy. You didn't want an answer to that?
Senator Mundt. That was a statement of the Chair.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, I merely want to make one obser-
vation on the general question of the informants, involving both a
legal question and a moral question.
I don't believe the Government can be on both sides. It runs in my
mind that in 1862, Congress passed a law which said, in effect, to any
citizen of the country :
If yon will inform on somebody who has failed to pay his taxes or other
matters, there will be a reward in the form of 25 percent of the recovery.
If my memory serves me correctly, the informer statute, which was
signed "by Abraham Lincoln, is still upon the statute books.
Senator McCarthy. I think you are right.
Senator Dirksen. As a matter of fact, it was modified somewhat
by Congress a few years ago. If Government says to its people through
the Congress, "If you will inform on your fellow citizen, you will
receive a portion of whatever is recovered," there is a moral aspect to
the matter, and I am just wondering where you place the dividing
line.
It is not an easy question.
Senator McCarthy. I may say. Senator, that if you have a law, as
we have, on the books for nearly a hundred years providing that we
give a bonus to individuals who give information about financial
wrongdoing, it is completely incomprehensible to say, "but you must
keep information about treason secret. You cannot give that to the
Congress."
Senator Dirksen. Before Senator McClellan leaves, I want to
raise this one question.
I am frankly disturbed, as you are, about this thing.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2833
Senator McCleixan. I trust the Senator will accord that I am sin-
cere in this. I have no personalities involved in this. They are all
the same to me. I am just tryincr to get a question settled here, if we
can, if there is any way to do it, that will be a guide for all of us. 1
think I can get information, too, if that is legal.
Senator Dirksen. It is a question that admits of no easy solution.
You might approach it legalistically or try to look at all sides. I am
wondering about a case like this. Let's assume a document in a file of
which two men have knowledge which, if it fell into the hands of the
enemy, could be regarded as giving aid and comfort to the enemy,
which is the accepted definition for treason. Suppose one of the two
should say, "I have a friend who will transmit this to the enemy," and
the other admonished him of his duty to his country, and then went to
complain to his superior about it and got no satisfactory answer, and
then called it to the attention of some Member of the House or Senate.
Legally and morally, where do you draw the line where the security
of the country is involved ? It might be a clear case of treason. Should
one of the two individuals with an ingrained sense of loyalty and
devotion say, "This is treason if you give it and while I get no com-
fort from my superior by telling him that you have this in mind, I
will call up one of the Senators and tell him about it."
The question is, what about the legal aspect, but what about the
moral aspect that is involved as well ?
Senator McCarthy. May I say, Senator, I think you have raised
and covered the point so well it doesn't require any answer of any
kind, i personally feel that the oath which every individual takes
to defend this country against all enemies, foreign or domestic, places
upon him the heavy responsibility to bring to the Congress any in-
formation of wrongdoing where the matter is not being taken care
of properly by his superiors.
Take the Harry Dexter White case, for example. If someone in
the executive department had come to the Congress at that time and
given the information which we got after Harry Dexter White was
dead, it might have meant that many men who are dead today would
still be living. We know now we had a top Communist spy in the
Treasury Department, wrecking the money system in China, planning
our occupation in Europe.
I may say, Senator, that I feel strongly that it isn't even a close
question. I think that oath to defend our country against all enemies,
foreign and domestic, towers above and beyond any loyalty you
might have to the head of a bureau or the head of a department.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. I am still in trouble about the list of employees of the
committee. Through Colonel Murray I have been informed that Sena-
tor McCarthy wishes to see the list before it is submitted to the Penta-
gon. If that is correct, could it be done ?
Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman, I am sorry
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, could I have just 2 minutes, a
recess for 2 minutes ?
Senator Muxdt. There will be a recess for not over 5 minutes.
Senator Jackson. May I raise a point of order to clarify some-
thing? I think it is a matter of public record. I believe the law
2834 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
requires that the names of employees on every committee be published
at the beginning of each year in the Congressional Record.
Senator Mundt. I think they are available in the public record.
Senator Jackson. It is a matter of public record.
Mr. CoHN. Senator, there is no point in anyone taking the valuable
time of the committee on this. Of course the names will be supplied.
Senator Mundt. The names will be supplied immediately after the
recess.
(Brief recess.)
Senator Mundt. The committee will please come to order. Those
that have seats assigned to them, will kindly take them. Those that
do not, will look enviously at those who have seats assigned and we
will come to order again.
At the time of Ihe recess. Senator Dirksen had just concluded his
10-minute go-round. The next committee member in order is Senator
Jackson.
Senator Jackson. I will pass at this time.
Senator McCarthy. I think at the time I asked for the 2-minute
recess, I was called back to my office, and there was a question as to
whether or not Mr. Welch or anybody else could have the names of
the staff members. They can have the names of all the staff members.
It is almost noon now, I would like to check over the list and make
sure that you have all those who are working with the staff', and if you
want those at — would 1 o'clock be all right, Mr. Welch ?
Mr. Welch. This is for Senator Symington. I am trying to oblige
him. I am informed. Senator, that the Pentagon has a list of some
sort, not up to date, and they are working on that list.
Senator McCarthy. We will bring it up to date. Senator Syming-
ton, we will give you a list at 1 o'clock.
Senator McClellan. When was the last list published in the Con-
gressional Record ? They can get it in there and proceed from there.
Senator McCarthy. I think that was in January. That would not
be up to date. The list of staff members are public. There is no rea-
son why anyone shouldn't have the complete list. If 1 o'clock
Senator Mundt. You can check and bring it up to date by 1 o'clock.
That will be fine. You can give 1 list, if you will, to Mr. Welch and 1
list to Senator Symington, and everyone will be in possession of what
he wants.
Senator Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. I will pass at this time.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak?
Senator Dworshak. No questions at this time.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak will pass.
Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. Senator McCarthy, I asked you a question,
and to refresh my memory as well as yours, I would like to ask the
question again. If you are a person authorized to receive this docu-
ment under the law, there is no violation of the law.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator Symington. If you are not authorized to receive the docu-
ment, there is a violation. It is as simple as that, isn't it'^ I would
appreciate a "Yes" or "No" answer, if you can give one.
Senator McCarthy. I think it is about that simple.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2835
Senator Symington. Now, I understand you believe as permanent
chairman of the Subcommittee on Investigations, you are an author-
ized person to receive classified documents, is that right?
_ Senator McCarthy. I am an authorized person to receive informa-
tion in regard to any wrongdoing in the executive branch. When you
say classified documents. Senator Symington, certainly I am not
authorized to receive anything which would divulge the names of, we
will say, informants, of Army intelligence, anything which would in
any way compromise their investigative technique, and that sort of
thing. But as chairman of this watchdog committee, I think that is
what you call it, I feel I am dutybound to receive any information
about wrongdoing.
Senator Symington. Let's take a typical illustration. I agree with
Senator Dirksen and Senator McClellan, this is a fundamental propo-
sition and it may be the one good thing that has come out of the hear-
ings, if we can analyze it. I believe that probably the man in this Gov-
ernment who knows the most about security matters might possibly
be the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council. Now,
suppose the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council
decides that he has some information which he thinks is derogatory,
and he believes that somebody on the National Security Council, let's
say the Director of Mobilization, is doing something which is against
the best interests of the country. Does he have the right to give you a
classified document in that case ?
Senator McCarthy. Well, Mr. Symington, you have made a num>
ber or assumptions in that question, with which I do not agree. I
think the man best and most eminently qualified on any question of
security, and I don't like to ride his coattails also, I know his shoulders
must be getting rather sore over the past 32 days, is J. Edgar Hoover.
As far as the Chairman of the National Security Council is con-
cerned
Senator Symington. No; the Executive Secretary.
Senator McCarthy. The Executive Secretary, Mr. Bundy.
Senator Symington. The President is the Chairman.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Bundy, I believe, is the liaison working-
with that individual. Mr. Bundy, as you very well know. Senator,
has
Senator Symington. I don't know anything about Mr. Bundy, to
be honest.
Senator McCarthy. Well, we discused it in executive session with
you ; period.
Senator Symington. Let me make another illustration, then. Sup-
pose that the Deputy Director of the CIA believes that he has infor-
mation to show that the Director of the CIA is functioning against the
security of the United States, the Deputy Director reporting to the
Director. Does he have the right to bring a classified paper down
here to you as chairman of this committee?
Senator McCarthy. First, Mr. Symington, let's not worry so much
about the paper, but rather the information. If the Deputy Director
of CIA or anyone else has information that anyone is guilty of wrong-
doing, then he should bring that information to the representatives of
the people; namely, yourself. Senator Mundt, any of us— I may cor-
rect that. I am not sure whether he should bring it to my Deinocrat
friends, because they say they will expose his name.
2836 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, a point of personal privilege.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan on a point of personal privilege.
Senator McClellan. Senator, you haven't heard this Democrat say
that he would expose any names. You know that.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, if you disagree with me on that— I
can't go through the testimony now, but I will be glad to at the open-
ing of the afternoon's session, point out to you where you said that
you would give the names of any of your informants. I felt that
was an unwise statement at the time.
Senator McClellan. That was with refei-ence to that picture down
in the restaurant. I told you I would give you that if you wanted it.
I have never told you, or anyone else has never made any statement
Senator Mundt. May the Chair say he believes he heard Senator
McClellan say today, in today's testimony, that he did not favor
giving out the names of informants.
Senator McClellan. I certainly don't, Mr. Chairman.
Senator McCarthy. Senator McClellan, could we agree on this,
and I think it would be of great benefit right now, because as you
know, as of now we have 47 Republicans and 48 Democrats, and 1
Independent. We don't know who will be the chairman of this com-
mittee after the first of the year. If the Democrats win
Senator Symington. Could I ask that this not be out of my time?
Senator Mundt. It is not out of your time. It is a point of personal
privilege.
Senator McCarthy. Could Ave now, you and I both say to the pub-
lic, you will either be the chairman or the ranking Democrat member,
I will either be the chairman or the ranking Republican member.
Can we now say to the public, say to the people who are working in
Government, that if they know of any wrongdoing, that no phony
stamp of secrecy or classification should keep that from the Con-
gress— can we agree now, John, that if anyone brings you informa-
tion or me information, if they do that in a confidential manner, that
their names will not be made public ? If we do that
Senator McClellan. I will state my position very frankly.
If they do it legally, no, their names will not be given out. I will
not protect people in crime.
Now, if it is a crime, that is the issue I am trying to get settled.
But if you want to take the other position, that is your privilege.
But I say frankly that I will not protect people in crime against my
Government. As to giving information, I clon't blame you for the
position you took with respect to the one who gave you the document,
if you felt that it was legal and you had a right to it.
I would certainly agree with you that you were under no obliga-
tion whatsoever to give his name. That is the position I take. But
1 go back to the position, at all times, that I will not condone crime.
I don't know what your position is.
Senator JSIcCarthy. Senator, could we do this, and I don't want
to pursue this any further, because we are all trying to end these
hearings. Can we agree that if anyone in Government knows of
any wrongdoing, whether it is theft, whether it is treason, whether it
is Communist infiltration, that if he comes to you, or if he comes to
me, that we will consider that he is doing his duty, and that he is not
guilty of any crime, because the law says he has the right and the duty
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2837
to do it. He takes an oath of office to protect this Nation. If we
could agree on that, Senator
Senator McClellan. Tliat is your position.
Senator INIcCarthy. May I finish? If we could agree on that, then
I think that much of Ihis time Avhich might otherwise be considered
wasted, would not be wasted.
Senator INIcClellan. May I say to you in answer to that, if one
brings to me a classified document and I am of the opinion he lias
violated the law, then I would be under no obligation to keep his
name secret. And until you can settle that question, I cannot
follow
Senator McCarthy. I guess I will campaign for the Republicans
rather strongly this year, then.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes nnder the point of personal
privilege Senator McClellan has made his point clear, and Senator
McCarthy has.
Senator Symington had the floor.
Senator Jackson. A point of personal privilege. I will make it
brief.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will hear you.
Senator Jackson. I don't believe there is anything in the record
on the part of us on the Democratic side that we would not accept
information of wrongdoing from individuals in the Government. The
FBI operates on the premise that it must get information from peo-
ple. But it is one thing to talk about an employee coming up to the
Hill and saying So-aiid-So may be violating the law or doing things
that are wrong and report to a Member of Congress verbally. I think
every citizen has an obligation to report violations of law. But this
is one Senator who wants to make it clear that an employee of the
Government and a citizen has no right to violate the law to report
a violation. They can come up and say, "So-and-So is a crook down
in the Government, and you ought to look into it," but that doesn't
give the citizen the right to take classified secret documents up to
the Hill in violation of a statute of Congress. There is a vast
difference.
I don't believe the FBI asks people to go out and violate the law in
order to give them information.
All of us want employees, all citizens, to report to them violations
of Federal law where Congress has jurisdiction. I don't want the
record to stand that at least I, as one member of this committee, am
not interested in getting information of wrongdoing. That is one
thing. But to ask an employee to commit a wrong in order to re-
port a wrongdoing is something else.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington, you may continue.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I assume that is in the nature of
a question or a comment. Senator Jackson makes a very unusual
statement here. He says it would be a violation of the law, apparently,
under certain circumstances to report wrongdoing.
Senator Jackson. I said to take a classified document.
Senator McCarthy. It is just not correct. Senator. Whenever
there is any wrongdoing, any graft, corruption, treason, the person
.who reports that to the Congress cannot be guilty of any wrongdoing.
2838 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
May I say, if I may have 30 seconds for this, Mr. Chairman, I did
everything possible, as the Chair knows, to try to get my Democrat
friends to come back on this committee. I fe]t that the work was so
imi^ortant we should have had them here. I have always had the
highest respect for the Senator from Arkansas. I just wonder now
whether it is wise to lean as far over backward as we did, when they
are notifying, in effect. Federal employees that they should not give
us evidence of wrongdoing.
Senator Jackson
Senator Jackson. I didn't say that. Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Whether you did or not. Senator
Senator Jackson. You read the record. .
Senator McCarthy. You have a great jury here on the television
audience. I think any man who can add 2 and 2 will assume that you
are saying that if someone brings you evidence of wrongdoing, that
that is improper if he may be violating an order of his department
Take, for example— Senator Symington, I think you and I should
agree on this. May I take another 10 seconds, if I may.
We read into the record the other day a new secrecy rule on the part
of FOA, a secrecy rule which became effective, I believe, m April of
this year, which provided that where they could not stamp comethmg
"Secret" under any Presidential directive, they could stamp it "For
Official Use Only," a rather fantastic document. I think we can gain
something here if all of the Senators could agree, regardless of
whether we have a Democrat or a Republican in the White House— the
time may even come when we have a Democrat ; I hope not— that we
do not have any secrecy rule that prevents a Federal employee from
giving the Members of Congress evidence of wrongdoing. If we
could agree on that, we could accomplish something.
Senator Jackson. Senator, so a clerk in the FBI who has a top
secret document, who carries it up to a Member of Congress on the
Hill in defiance of an order of J. Edgar Hoover, is doing the right
thing, reveals wrongdoing within the Federal Bureau
Senator McCarthy. I don't know of any wrongdoings in the Fed-
eral Bureau. . ^ . ,
Senator Jackson. I didn't ask that question. I said supposing a
clerk in the FBI who has in his or her custody top secret material and
feels that the superiors above are guilty of wrongdoing and are not
handling it properly, it is perfectly all right for that clerk to bring
it up to any Member of Congress or a chairman of a committee in
defiance of an order of Mr. Hoover?
Senator McCarthy. No. 1, you are assuming that Mr. Hoover would
try to protect wrongdoers in the FBI.
Senator Jackson. Can't we give you a hypothetical case? That
is what we are talking about here.
Senator McCarthy. That is wrong. Mr. Hoover would not. i
think that is an unfair implication.
Senator Jackson. What if Mr. Hoover is not there next year i He
can't be there forever, even though he is a great man.
Senator McCarthy. Your question is, if someone knows— let s make
it specific. Let me answer the question. If someone knows, for
example
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2839
Senator Symington. I would like to go aliead with my questions.
The first thing you know, it is going to be afternoon and I haven't
asked any questions.
Senator Mundt. The Chair feels
Senator McCarthy. I would say that is no great tragedy.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson will wait until his next go-around
to ask Senator JMcCarthy the question. It has gotten away from the
point of personal privilege.
Senator McCarthy. I will answer as soon as I have a chance.
Senator Jackson. I would be interested in the answer to that
question.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington has been waiting, and the time
has not been taken out of his time. The Chair now recognizes Sena-
tor Symington.
Senator Symington. Thank you.
The other two Democratic Senators have stated their position. I
would like to state mine. In all Government agencies which I ran in
the executive branch, my office was always open to any dissident, any
person who thought he had something which his boss was not doing
right or he wasn't getting a fair deal. I would say that in at least 90
percent of the cases after investigation the complainant, the fellow
who had gotten up to me with his problem or had come to the Hill,
was entirely wrong.
As to the other things, I would say I also believe crime is wrong,-
and I believe m a Government of law and not of men.
Senator McCarthy. You say you think crime is wrong?
Senator Symington. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. That is a fine statement.
Senator Symington. I am for a Government of law and not men.
Now may I continue with the questioning?
As I understand. Senator, going back to the last one, do you be-
lieve as chairman of the Permanent Committee on Investigations you
are an authorized person to receive classified document; is that right?
Senator McCarthy. First, Senator, I assume when you made that
comment that you may have wanted me to comment on it. I would
say when you made that profound statement that crime is wront^, I
agree with you. "
No. 2, your question is whether as chairman of the Investigating
Committee I am entitled to receive classified documents. Let's
Senator Symington. Will the reporter read the question, please,
because the Senator didn't get it ?
Senator Mundt. The reporter will read the question.
(The reporter read from his notes as requested.)
Senator McCarthy. The answer to that, Air. Symington, is that no
one can deny us information by stamping something "classified."
Senator Symington. I am sorry, Senator, I didn't hear you.
Senator^McCARTHY. I said the answer to that is that no one can
deny us information, deny the American people information by stamp-
ing it "classified."
Senator Symington. Regardless of whether it is top secret, Q-
clearance, or secret ?
Senator McCarthy. It isn't a question of the stamp on it; we
should not receive or get any information which gives the names of
2840 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
any informants of any investigative agencies, anything that discloses
their investigative technique or anything which might endanger the
national security. We have not.
Senator Symington. Do you believe that other members of this
subcommittee are also entitled to receive such documents?
Senator McCarthy. Not those who say they will make public the
names of the informants.
Senator Symington. I will be glad to make public legal names of
informants.
Senator McCarthy. That is what I thought.
Senator Symington. I mean I would not make public names of
legal informants, but if there is a violation of law I think I would
have the right as a citizen to make public the name of an informant.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, could we agree there is no law?
Senator Symington. I think I would have the obligation to make the
name public.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, can we agree that there is no law
which allows a man to cover up wrongdoing ? The only law on the
book as far as I know covering that subject is the law of 1912 which
says that individuals in the executive have the right and duty to give
information to Members of Congress.
Senator Symington. Well, Senator, of course I wouldn't want to
give a name of an informant if it was legally right for him to give
me the information. As far as the law of 1912 goes, I have just
glanced at it, you sent it over here, it has nothing whatever to do w^ith
classified information. Let me ask another question : Do you believe
that the chairman of any other Senate committee, say the Senate
Committee on Internal Security, is also an authorized person for the
purpose of receiving such confidential documents?
Senator McCarthy. Any committee which has jurisdiction over
a subject has the right to receive the information. The stamp on the
document, I would say, does not control it. Any evidence of wrong-
doing should be made available to the people. Especially when it
has to do with treason.
Senator Symington. Regardless of instructions from his superior,
anybody can decide themselves, regardless of the classification of a
document, if they believe that it is wrong, whatever their superior
does, therefore they have the right to tell it to a congressional commit-
tee, is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, so there is no question, let me repeat
again, anyone who has evidence of wrongdoing, has not only the
right but the duty to bring that evidence to a congressional committee.
Now, Alger Hiss, you see, if you followed j'our line of reasoning.
Senator, Alger Hiss would not be in jail. Alger Hiss could stamp
the information about himself secret and top secret. You just can't
do that.
Senator Symington. Senator, I think we have had that before in
the hearing. Now, let me ask you this question : Suppose there was
something that a person felt was wrong but turned out not to be
wrong. Then what would happen? Suppose that a man came to
you from an agency and said, "I have information to show that my
boss on the Chiefs of Staff is a traitor, or has done something which
I think is inimical to the best interests of the United States," and that
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2841
turned out to be totally false. What is the procedure from there on ?
Do we investigate and check whether the man is right or not? What
do we do about that ? Do we turn it over to the FBI ?
Senator McCarthy. I think the Senator is fully familiar with the
rules, and that is that the name of no one accused of wrongdoing is
made public until, No. 1, he appears before the committee and is^'al-
lowed to testify under oath, and, No. 2, until sufficient facts are in to
convince the committee that there is wrongdoing.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. Cohn, have you questions ?
Mr. CoHN. No, sir.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, or Mr. St. Clair, you have 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Senator, I don't know that I can throw any light on
this wrestle that the Senators have with you, but my note reads as
follows, that it is your testimony that no one can deny us— and by
that I take it you mean the committee— information by stampinrj a
document "classified" or "confidential." Is that your position, sir?
Senator McCarthy. No information of any wrongdoing.
Mr. Welch. That is right. So that if the FBI has a report about
some wrongdoing, and has the temerity to stamp it "classified" or
"confidential," it may still be brought to you by some disgruntled
Government employee, is that right or wrong, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Well, No. 1
Mr. Welch. There is only one answer to that. Is that right or
wrong ?
Mr. McCarthy. Well, I will answer it as I think it should be
answered. No, 1, we have received no information from the FBI.
No. 2—1 do think, Mr. Welch, and I know you are asking for the
information, I think— No. 2, if the FBI has been issuing reports to a
certain agency, that, we will say, Mr. "X" is a traitor, is guilty of
-Pyii^g? espionage, and what have you, if someone in that agency
knows that the reports were being ignored, I think he has a duty to
bring that to this committee, to the Jenner committee, to the V'elde
committee, some committee with jurisdiction.
Mr. Welch. That is what I thought you meant, sir, and I think
we understand each other.
Senator McCarthy. Good.
INIr, Welch. And as far as you are concerned, the appearance on the
top of the document of the words either "classified" or "confidential,"
just don't impress you, is that right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Not if that is a classification to cover up
wrongdoing or treason.
Mr. Welch. And if it is put on by the FBI, it does not impress you ?
Senator McCarthy. I know we are riding on Hoover's coattails
here rather heavily, but as far as I am concerned, I never have received
any information directly from the FBI.
Mr. Welch. Not directly, sir, but you get a
Senator McCarthy. If and when that occasion arises, I will deal
with it.
Mr. Welch. But you are quite ready to take it second-hand, aren't
you, sir ?
Senator IMcCarthy. Apparently somebody thinks this is a laughing-
matter back here in this room.
Mr. Welch. I didn't suggest that, Senator.
2842 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
Senator McCarthy. I know you didn't, Mr. Welch. You and I
agree on the importance of this. Let me answer your question. If
the FBI, as in the Alger Hiss case, has reported evidence of treason to
a department, if the head of that department knows all about it, if he
refuses to act on it, then I think it is the duty of any American who
loves his country, to bring that to the attention of the proper investi-
gating committee, and I think that is the rule that we should follow,
not only in 1954 but in 1964, 1974, 1984, 1994. Otherwise, Ur, Welch,
if we can cover up wrongdoing, if we can cover up treason by a stamp
of secrecy, then you and I won't — strike that. Let's say that this
Nation certainly won't have too long to live.
Mr. Welch. Well, Senator, let's try it one more time and then let's
be done with it. I take it, sir
Senator McCarthy. Try what one more time ?
Mr. Welch. One more question from me to you.
Senator McCarthy. Good.
Mr. Welch. I take it that it is your position that when the dis-
gi'untled employee who sees before him this document stamped "clas-
sified" or "confidential", emanating from the FBI, and is dissatisfied
with the progress that is being made about it, he may at any time, with
propriety, deliver it to you. Can you tell me whether that is correct
or not ?
Senator McCarthy. You have included things in your question
which are untrue. You talk about a disgruntled employee. If that
definition
Mr. Welch. Strike out "disgruntled" and have it "an ordinary em-
ployee."
Senator McCarthy, Mr. Welch, you are trying to cast reflection
upon the men who bring to the Congress information which is needed.
According to your definition
Mr. Welch. Senator
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish, Mr. Welch. According to your
definition, the young man who came to Senator Mundt and gave him
information of treason in the State Department, the treason of Alger
Hiss, if that young man had followed what apparently is your rule of
conduct, then Alger Hiss would undoubtedly, as of this moment, as of
this 15th day of June 1954, he would undoubtedly be holding a high
position in this Government.
If that is your definition of "disgruntled," a young man who gives
evidence of treason, who respects his oaths to defend his country
against all enemies, foreign and domestic, you and I have a much dif-
ferent definition of "disgruntled."
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, I am not trying to settle the ques-
tion we have under discussion. I am trying, sir, only to illuminate
it so that the country will know what we are talking about. Do you
understand that, sir"?
Senator McCarthy. I understand exactly what you are trying to
do, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Do you understand, sir, I am not trying to attack you
when I ask you these questions?
Senator McCarthy. I understand exactly what you are trying to
. do, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. This is what I am trying to do, and you can help me,
and we will be done with it
SPECIAL INVESTIGATIOISr 2843
Senator McCarthy. I will not help you in what you are trvino-
to do. -^ '^
Mr. Welch. One more effort and then I must let it go, and I must
trust you to answer me simply and directly so that the country will
know where you stand.
^ I take it, it is clear that it is your position, sir, that if the FBI
issues today a document marked "confidential" and some Govein-
ment employee has it and concludes that things are not movino- swiftly
enough, that the Government employee may with propriety brino- the
document to you ? i. i j t.
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Welch. The answer is "No," he may not?
Senator McCarthy. The answer is "No." The way you put the
question, the answer is "No."
Mr Welch. Now, Senator McCarthy, I wish to turn to quite a dif-
ferent matter. I am looking at page 6247 of the record. It will
be a very short reference, but you certainly
Senator McCarthy. Will you wait 1 second while I get that, Mr.
Vv elch ? * '
Mr. Welch. Right.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. What day is that, Mr. Welch ?
Mr. Welch. That is volume 31, the 10th of June, page 6247
Senator McCarthy. Just 1 minute; 6247, right.
Senator Mundt. Time back in.
^^^\}\^}'^^\ Yo" ^'ere being asked the question at the top of the
page if this college graduate, referring to Schine, partially filled out
an application, leaving out substantial parts of it as thou<Th it were
unimportant and that a general of the Army had to call him up
and get him back and have him come back there at a later date and
really fill out, as other applicants have to fill out, an application, a
lorm lor a commission m the Army.
fillS"out'^ McCarthy. I dont know the slightest thing about the application he
Mr. Jenkins. You don't linow one thing about that'
Senator McCarthy. I never saw it.
Senator, I have the application that David Schine filled out, and
i can show you
Senator McCarthy. Don't tell me I notarized it.
Mr. Welch. I am sorry ?
Senator McCarthy. I say, don't tell me I notarized it.
Mr. Welch. No ; you merely signed it.
Senator Mundt. You may proceed, Mr. Welch.
JMr. Welch. Would you prefer. Senator, the copy that has your
original signature, or would you be content with a photostat of it«
Senator McCarthy. I will take your word for it. If you say I
notarized it or signed it, I will take your word for it.
Air. Welch. IMay I say to you, Senator, that I don't think it is a
devastating thing to have this turn up, but it happens to be inaccurate
when you say you didn't know anything about it. You did sio-n it
and I am going to ask you to look at it, since I want to ask you a ques-
tion or two about it.
Senator McCarthy. May I still say that I don't know anythino'
about it? I don't recall ever having seen it.
2844 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. I am showing you-
Senator McCarthy. When you say I signed it, I am sure I did,
(Document handed to Senator McCarthy.)
Mr. Welch. I am showing you a certified copy, and if you will look
at the clip on the last 2 or 3 pages and open it where the clip has it
together, you will, I think, see your signature.
Senator McCarthy. I want to make it clear that it was notarized by
Bob Stevens, not by me.
Mr. Welch. It wasn't notarized by me.
Senator McCarthy. It was notarized by Kobert T. Stevens. What
page do you want me to go to ?
Mr. Welch. The clip there. The clip is on the page that has your
signature, the clip tow\ard the bottom.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. It is there all right, isn't it. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. It certainly is.
Mr. Welch. Now I want you to turn to the first page of it, if you
will, where Mr. Schine states his qualifications. You observe a block
of typewriting.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has expired. I suggest you
pursue this in your next 10 minutes, because otherwise we are going to
enliven the hearings for some time when we get to it.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn will give his 10 minutes to Mr.
Welch, if that is agreeable.
Senator Mundt. He has already passed his 10 minutes.
Mr. Jenkins ?
Mr. Jenkins. I pass.
Senator Mundt. The Chair has, I think, only one question, and it
goes to the discussion of which we have had a great deal this morning,
and which I think is very helpful and very constructive. That is the
dual responsibility in our coordinate system of government of the
executive branch and of the legislative branch to try to protect the in-
terests of the people. We are all in happy agreement, all around the
table, that we have in the FBI and under J. Edgar Hoover the world's
best security organization, not only from the standpoint of protecting
the safety of this country against subversion, but from the standpoint
of protecting us all against crime.
The Chair wants to point out, however, that conceivably a time
could come when just to mention the letters "FBI" might not surround
them with the halo which very rightfully surrounds those letters today.
He calls to the attention of Senator McCarthy, who was not in Con-
gress at the time, that about 8 or 10 years ago, when the New Deal was
at its peak, a deliberate elf ort was then made to "get" J. Edgar Hoover.
Senator McCarthy. Eight.
Senator Mundt. I happened to be a Member of the House at that
time, and I want here and now to pay tribute to a great Democrat from
Boston, a compatriot of yours, Mr. Welch, the majority leader of the
House of Representatives at that time, John McCormack, to whom I
went personally and mentioned the information I had about this effort
on the part of some politicians in government to get rid of J. Edgar
Hoover.
The record will show that John McCormack went to bat for J.
Edgar Hoover, both within the councils of his own party and publicly,
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2845
and this effort to replace him with a man who would have been a
politician instead of a grand security officer died in its tracks.
I mention that only for this reason, that all of us should keep in
mind that there could come some unhappy day when J. Edgar Hoover,
who is mortal like the rest of us, is not there, or when he might be
replaced by some politician for a political purpose. Under those
circumstances, it is entirely conceivable to the chairman that if the
FBI ceased to be a grand organization to protect us against disloyalty
and to protect us against dishonesty and against danger and detri-
mental information, and could be used for political purposes, we must
not let the idea get abroad that such an FBI, so mismanaged and so
misused, should then have the right to stamp on its derelictions
"Secret" and "Classified" and deny the people's representatives in Con-
gress the right to expose such a sad situation.
I think we all know that that day is not here, and it is not here,
and I hope it never comes, but I don't want the record to stand un-
corrected that this committee believes, or at least this individual
Senator believes, that we are establishing a formula which says if the
FBI can be captured by those who would destroy America, we have
agreed in advance that the formula to do it is to stamp your docu-
ments "Classified" and then no Member of Congress, no congressional
committee, shall have any right wdiatsoever to protect the public.
It is a hypothetical situation. I think it should be added to the
record because of the Chair's personal knowledge of the attempt that
was made some years ago.
That was not a question. It does not require an answ^er.
Senator McClellan, you have 10 minutes.
Senator McClellan. I would only make this comment on what the
distinguished chairman has said. If we are entitled to documents,
if it is right for us to have them, I believe the law should provide
that we can get them by subpena.
Maj'be I am wrong about that, but I think the orderly processes of
government should prevail, and not the individual conscience of
individuals.
So if it is right for us to have them — I am not saying it isn't. I
can well appreciate that there are cases, and there could develop con-
ditions where there would be such corruption, such traitors in the
executive branch of the Government.
I hope you are not implying there are such in there now, but if that
time should come I think that Congress should have the power and
say so by proper enactment of law.
That is the position I take. I simply believe in law, a government
by law and not government by the conscience of individuals whose
conscience often varies. That is not a safe anchor for the security
of this country.
Mr. Chairman, I shall now proceed with two or three other ques-
tion. I guess our time is running out.
Senator, let's go back to the documents, if we may, please, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. I call j'^our attention to paragraph 5, which
reads, the first sentence or part of it reads
Senator McCarthy. You are reading from the Army charges or
from our answer 1
2846 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McClellan. I am reading from your document. It is just
a short sentence.
Senator McCarthy. Go right ahead, Senator.
Senator McClellan (reading).
As further evidence of the dishonesty of the attack npon my staff issued through
Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams
Senator McCarthy. What page is that, Senator?
Senator McClellan. It is page 3 on this mimeographed copy I
have.
Senator McCarthy. I find it now.
Senator McClellan. I am calling your attention to the word "dis-
honesty."
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. Did you at that time feel and do you now
feel that the charges against your staff, as you have referred to it in
this language, v-ere a dishonest attack?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir. In fact. Senator, the charges against
Mr. Carr, as you know, have had absolutely no evidence to back them
up whatsoever. That makes dishonesty.
Senator McClellan. I am talking about the charges. Do you
think they were dishonest?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. Now I call your attention
Senator McCarthy. Could I call the Senator's attention to the one
word here, however? I said "issued through Mr, Stevens and Mr.
Adams." I emphasized the word "through."
Senator McClellan. In that instance, then, you disclaim that you
are charging Mr. Stevens or Secretary Stevens and Mr. Adams with
dishonesty ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator McClellan, I don't know who thought
up this smear. Much of that is clouded in mystery because of the re-
luctance of some people to testify, and because of the Presidential
order.
Senator McClellan. And because of the reluctance of the com-
mittee to subpena?
Now let's turn to page 4, paragraph G. I read the last sentence of
paragraph 6 :
When placed in proper perspective, it will be found to have given greater aid
and comfort to Communists and security risks, than any single other obstacle
ever designed.
I think that refers to, if you v/ill agree with me, the report which
is in quotations in the sentence above, and that refers to the chrono-
logical— the document of chronological events, dees it not ?
Senator McCarthy, Yes. If you are going to ask me whether or
not I agree with this. Senator, may I say that I think there are other
things which have given much more comfort to the Communists,
I think, for example, the situation disclosed by our committee when
the Senator from Arkansas was on the committee, the trade with Ked
China, I think that was far more important than this report, I think
that there are a number of other things might have given greater aid
and comfort. The language of the rei)ort, I
Senator McClellan. Are you saying that is an exaggeration in
your charge there ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2847
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't say an exaggeration. I think if
you referred to the aid and comfort to Communists in Government
in this country, then it would be accurate. If you refer to aid and
comfort to communism as a whole, there might — I am sure there
have been other situations which have given them more aid and com-
fort.
Senator McCleixan. "VYliether there is greater or lesser is not very
important.
Senator McCarthy. I think this has been a great service to the
Communist Party. For 4 months or thereabout we have not been able
to proceed with our work of digging out the Communists.
Senator McClellan. Well, if we have exposed those in top places
in the Department of the Army who are protecting those, who are
protecting those who have infiltrated into the Government, aren't we
rendering some discomfort to the Communists by doing that?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, may I say this, and I didn't want to
mt into this, but I have got to be frank about these answers. The
Senator from Arkansas, for whom I have a great deal of respect,
always have had, and I feel that he is what you refer to when you call
a good Democrat. However, I find to my surprise
Senator McClellan. That doesn't necessarily recommend him too
highly, just the fact that he is a good Democrat, does it?
Senator McCarthy. I find to my surprise that the Senator from
Arkansas was visited by the chief counsel of the Army 5 days before
he came back on the committee. I find that my Democrat friends
came back on the committee and we leaned over backward, gave
them every consideration that they asked for. I find that since that
time, Senator, we have been doing practically nothing, except spend-
ing the time, the money, the efforts of the committee, in investigating
charges which I think all of us now agree are completely without
foundation.
Senator ]\IcClellan. Do you mean the charges you have made are
without foundation ?
Senator McCarthy. No ; I am referring to the charges against my
staff.
Senator McClellan. That is what we are investigating now.
Senator McCarthy. Senator McClellan, I made an answer to the
charges that were made. We did not make charges, we answered
them. The Senator, I believe, is a lawyer. He knows that when
somebody comes in a court, he makes charges. The man against whom
the charges are made makes an answer.
Now, I stand by this answer completely. As I say, I am disturbed
by many aspects of this case. We don't know at this point
Senator jMcClellan. So am I.
Senator McCarthy. We don't know at this point, Senator, what
part Senator Symington's lawyer took in inducing
Senator McClellan. I have been trying to find out for you.
Senator McCarthy. Well, we could get that if
Senator McClellan. I am just as disturbed as you are.
Senator McCarthy. If Stu would take the stand, you would per-
haps find out.
Senator Symington. You know the basis upon which I will take
the stand. Senator.
Senator McClellan. Just a moment.
2848 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Mundt. Senator :McClellan has the floor.
Senator McClellan. You say, Senator, that your document is only
an answer. If one has made a charge against you, and m turn in your
answer you say he is a liar, don't you regard that as a charge against
him ?
Senator McCarthy. It is an answer.
Senator McClellan. Can an answer include or embrace a charge?
I believe you are a lawyer, too.
Senator IMcCartht. An answer might well embrace a counter,
charge or counterclaim, call it what you may.
Senator McClellan. All right, let's refer to yours as counter-
charges, then. In this countercharge here, the issuing of this docu-
ment has given greater aid and comfort to Communists and security
risks than any single other obstacle ever designed. Will you now state
that that action is the act of a patriotic, honest, official of the Gov-
ernment ?
Senator McCarthy. Patriotic, honest ?
Senator McClellan. Yes, using language you have used.
Senator McCarthy. I don't want to delve into the mmd of Secre-
tary Stevens. I think what he did was grossly improper. What influ-
ences there were that induced him to do this, I don't know. We learn,
as we go through these hearings, that 2 days before the Stevens- Adams
charges were made, that Stevens said to one of the Senators in one of
these monitored phone calls, he said in effect, "There is really nothing
to this."
Senator McClellan. I understand that. That doesn't answer my
question. ■, ■ . ^ .
Senator McCarthy. Let me say this. I think it was highly im-
proper, let's make no mistake about that, it is highly improper to file
these fraudulent, dishonest charges.
Senator McClellan. I agree with you, and I think it goes both
ways. If they are dishonest charges, it is highly improper. I think it
is most reprehensible, on either side. And I hope you agree with me.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, but I think the Senator should point out
where, at any point in our answer, we said anything that has not been
proven to be true.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired.
It being 12 :30, we will recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12 :30 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at
2 p. m., the same day.)
INDEX
Page
Adams, John G 2813, 2S14, 2824, 2828, 2846
Air Force (United States) 2815
Anastos, Mr 2822
Army (United States) 2814,
2815, 2817, 2818, 2820, 2823, 2824, 2827, 2820, 2843, 2845, 2847
Army commission 2843
Army Military Intelligence (G-2) 2815, 2817, 2818, 2S23, 2835
Army War College 2817, 2827
Atomic Energy Commission 2817
Attorney General of the United States 2814, 2816, 2818
Browneil, Mr 2815, 2816
Buudy, Mr 2835
Capitol Police 2812
Carr, Francis P 2812, 2819, 2826-2828
Carroll Arms Hotel (Washington, D. C.) 2827
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 2817, 2835
Chairman of the National Security Coimcil 2835
Chiefs of Staff 2840
China 2833
CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) 2817, 2835
Clifford, Clark 2813, 2814
Cohn, Roy M 2820, 2822, 2826-2828
Coleman, Aaron 2815, 2817
Collier, Mr 2810, 2821
Committee on Internal Seciirity (Senate) 2840
Committee on PuMic Works (Senate) 2822
Communist infiltration in Government 2830
Communist infiltration in the military 2827
Communist-line books 2827
Communist-liners 2817
Communist Party ; 2813,
2814, 2817, 2822, 2823, 2825, 2827, 2829, 2833, 2830, 2840-2848
Communist spy 2833
Communists— 2813, 2814, 2817, 2822, 2823, 2825, 2827, 2829-2833, 2836, 2840-2848
Communists in Government 2823, 2847
Congressional Record 2834
Counselor to the Army 2813, 2814, 2824, 2828, 2846
Crime and Criminal Procedures (United States Code) 2821
Department of the Army 2814,
2815, 283 7, 2818, 2820, 2823, 2824, 2827, 2829, 2843, 2845, 2847
Department of Defense 2819, 2820, 2822
Department of State 2842
Deputy Director (Central Intelligence Agency) 2835
Director of Mobilization (National Security Council) 2835
Dirksen, Senator 2834, 2835
Espionage Act 2820
Europe 2833
Executive Secretary (National Securily Council) 2835
FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) 2815,
2817, 2821-2824, 2829, 2S37, 2841-2845
FBI document 2815, 2821
FBI report 2817
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 2815,
2817, 2821-2824, 2829, 2837, 2841-2845
Fifth amendment Communists 2813, 2814, 2825
n INDEX
Page
First Army Loyalty Board 2814, 2815
rOA (Foreign Operations Administration) 2838
Foreign Operations Administration (FOA) 2838
Fort Dix 2828
Fort Monmouth 2817, 2823-2825, 2828
G-2 (Military Intelligence) 2815, 2817, 2818, 2823, 2835
Hill (Capitol Hill) 2837, 2839
Hiss, Alger 2840, 2842
Hoover, J. Edgar 2815, 281G, 2S21, 2S35, 2S38, 2841, 2844, 2845
House of Keprosentatives 2833, 2844
Internal Security Committee (Senate) 2840
Jackson, Senator 2822
La Follette, Senator Bob, Sr 2831
La Follette Act 2822
Lincoln, Abraham 2832
Loyalty board 2814, 2sl5
McCarran Act 2821
McCarthy, Senator Joe, testimony of 2812-2848
McCarthy committee 2839
McClellan, Senator 2S18, 2826, 2835
McCormack, John 2844
Member of the House 2844
Memphis, Tenn 2812
Military Intelligence (G-2) 2815, 2817, 2818, 2823, 2835
Monitored telephone calls 2813, 2814
Mundt, Senator 2842
Murray. Colonel 2822, 2833
National Security Council (Executive ^'ecretary) 2835
Pentagon 2815, 2834
Pentagon screening board 2815
Peress 2813,2825
"Personal and Confidential via Liaison" (document) 2821
Potter, Senator 2811
President of the United States 2813, 2814, 2325, 2838, 2846
Presidential directive 2838
Presidential order 2846
Pro-Communist textbooks in the Army 2827
Public Works Committee (Senate) 2822
Radar laboratories 2815, 2822
Radar material 2818
Radar plants 2814
Rogers, Mr 2816
Russian espionage agents 2817
Ryan, General 2828
Schine, G. David 2828,2828,2843,2844
Secretary of the Army 2813-2815,2817,2818,2820,2823-2828,2844,2846
Secret radar laboratories 2822
Secret radar material 2818
Secret radar plants 2814
Senate Committee on Internal Security 2840
Senate Committee on Public Works 2822
Senate of the United States 2833
State Department 2842
Stevens, Robert T 2813-2815, 2817, 2818, 2820, 2823-2828, 2844, 2846
Symington, Senator 2814
Treasury Department 2830, 2833
Truman, President 2813, 2814, 2825
Truman Board 2814, 2825
United States Air Force 2815
United States Army 2814,
2815, 2817, 2818, 2820, 2823, 2824, 2827, 2829, 2843, 2845, 2847
United States Army War College 2817, 2827
United States Atomic Energy Commission 2817
United States Attorney General 2814, 2816, 2818
United States Code (Crime and Criminal Procedures) 2821
INDEX III
Page
United States Congress 2822, 2830-2832, 2837, 2838, 2840, 2842, 2844, 2845
United States Department of Defense 2819,2820,2822
United States Department of State 2842
United States House of Ilepreseutatives 2833, 2844
United States President 2813, 2814, 2825, 2838, 2846
United States Senate 2833
United States Treasury Department 2830
Velde Committee 2841
West Point 28?G, 2827
White, Harry Dexter 2810,2822,2833
Wliite House 2838
o
^KH-*>\
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES
AND COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRE-
TARY OF THE ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN
G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE HENSEL AND SENATOR
JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and
FRANCIS p. CARR
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-THIED CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PURSUANT TO
S. Res. 189
PART 69
JUNE 16, 1954
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
46620" V^ASHINGTON : 1954
Boston Pub" "'"7
Superintendent of Documents
NOV 2 4 1954
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
EVERETT Mckinley DIKKSEN, Illinois STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland THOMAS A. BURKE, Ohio
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan SAM J. ERVIN, JE., North Carolina
Richard J. O'Melia, General Counsel
Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk
Special Subcommittee on Investigations
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
Ray H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel
Thomas R. Prewitt, Assistant Counsel
Robert A. Collier, Assistant Counsel
SOLis HORWiTz, Assistant Counsel
Charles A. Maner, Secretary
CONTENTS
Page
Index i. J
Testimony of —
McCarthy, Senator Joe, United States Senate 2850
EXHIBITS
Introduced Appears
on page on pmje
40. Loyalty oath signed by G. David Schine 2851 (')
1 May be found in the flies of the subcommittee.
Ill
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES AND
COUNTERCHAKGES INVOLVING: SECRETARY OF THE
ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE
HENSEL AND SENATOR JOE McCARTHY, ROY M. COHN,
AND FRANCIS P. CARR
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 1954
United States Senate,
Special Subcommittee on Investigations
OF THE Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, D. C.
after recess
(The hearing was resumed at 2: 17 p. m., pursuant to recess.)
Present: Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota,
chairman; Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois;
Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan ; Senator Henry C.
Dworshak, Republican, Iclaho; Senator John L. McClellan, Demo-
crat, Arkansas; Senator Heniy M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington;
and Senator Stuart Symington, Democrat, Missouri.
Also present: Ray H. Jenkins, chief counsel; Thomas R. Prewitt,
assistant counsel ; Charles Maner, assistant counsel.
Principal participants present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a
United States Senator from the State of Wisconsin; Roy M. Colin,
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 again like to welcome the guests who have come
to the committee room today. We are happy to have you here observ-
ing one of your congressional committees in action. The Chair would
like to remind the audience of the standing committee rule which many
of you have heard many times before, to the effect that there are to
be no audible manifestations of approval or disapproval of anything
that occurs in the committee room. That includes applause, unneces-
sarily loud laughter, and things of that type.
The uniformed members of the Capitol Police force whom you see
before you, and the plainclothes people scattered throughout the
audience, have been requested by the committee to carry out the rule
to remove from the committee room immediately, firmly but politely,
any of our guests who, for reasons best known to themselves, might
elect to violate the terms of the conditions under which they entered
the room, namely, to refrain from any behavior that would in any way
interfere with the conduct of the hearing.
2849
2850 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
The Chair would like to acknowledge the presentation of this
little model of a ship, which is the model of the ship on which the
picture The Caine Mutiny was taken, and express to the members
of the committee that he has been advised by Columbia Pictures
that they are inviting the members of our counsel and the members of
the committee next week to have a previewing of that picture here in
Washington, So you may expect a letter through the mail, if not a
subpena, sooner or later.
Now we are ready to begin with the last set of questions by Senator
McClellan of Arkansas.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy ? i , ^ , „
Senator McCarthy. Did you say the "Caine" or the "Cohn '
Mutiny ?
Senator Mundt. "Caine."
I am not going to recognize Mr. Cohn on a point of personal priv-
ilege on that.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH E. McCARTHY, A UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN— Resumed
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I do have a point of personal
privilege I would like to raise here, not a matter that is too serious,
but I would like to have the record straight.
Senator Mundt. You may state your point of personal privilege.
Senator McCarthy. I know when a lawyer is extremely busy try-
ing a case, oftentimes he has shoved before him papers, and at first
glance he may misconstrue the importance of the particular docu-
ment. I think t-hat perhaps happened this morning as far as Mr.
Welch was concerned. While he and I have differed on a number
of occasions, I am sure that he would not at all attempt to misconstrue
a document. I am saying this in all seriousness.
This morning Mr. Welch asked me whether or not I had testified
that I had not seen or signed the Schine application for a commission.
He read from my testimony to the eft'ect that I had not. Mr. Welch
apparently, looking through these documents, was of the opinion
when he saw the name "Joe McCarthy" in the folder, that I had. _
I would like to now either make it clear or let Mr. Welch make it
clear that I did not affix my name to any application by Mr. Scliine
for a commission, nor recommend him for a commission. I think
that ]\Ir. Welch was justified in making this mistake, however, in that
my name is affixed as a witness to Mr. Schine's loyalty oath, the loyalty
oath to the efl'ect that he does not belong to— oh, there is a vast num-
ber of Communist-front organizations.
I raise this not in criticism of Mr. Welch, because I saw the folder
shoved before him just a couple of minutes before he raised this
question, and this is not a "Be Kind to Welch Day," you understand,
but I feel this was a very, very honest mistake.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. I think perhaps a comment from me is in order,
Senator.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will recognize you for that purpose.
Mr. Welch. The oath that you read from, it is true, is the so-called
loyalty oath or signature in respect to the subversive list of names on
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2851
it. It is signed "G. David Schine," and then there is a blank where it
says signature of witnessing officer, and Roy M. Cohn signed it.
Senator McCarthy. And McCarthy.
:Mr. Welch. And Senator, if you ask me why in the dickens your
name appears where it does, it is more than I know.
Senator McCarthy. Frankly, it is more than I know, too. I ap-
parently was asked— apparently Roy and I were asked to witness this
loyalty oath which attests that Dave didn't belong to any of these sub-
versive organizations. As you know, as a lawyer, witnessing a docu-
ment is a matter of form. I don't even recall when I witnessed this,
but this is definitely my signature, but it does not have anything to
do whatsoever with his application for a commission other than'^the
usual loyalty oath which he would take, I believe, in requestino- any
position in Government. ^
Mr. Welch. I think we are pretty well in agreement, if you will
add that the loyalty oath accompanies the application for a com-
mission.
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I think also, Mr. Welch, that we will
agree that while this is not attached to the balance of the file, at the
time this was handed to me, this was merely a loyalty oath. There
was no application for a commission attached to this and there is
nothing except this certification that he did not belong to these various
Communist-front organizations, period.
Mr. Welch. May I say one other thing? When I have my next 10
minutes, I will ask you certain questions based on the application
itself, which I see no point in offering in evidence. If you desire,
Senator, that the paper that you have had before you be offered in
evidence, it may be.
Senator McCarthy. No.
!Mr. Welch. As you wish.
Senator McCarthy. No ; I think that the members of the committee
might want to see it. If any members of the press care to see it,
good.
Mr. Welch. It is a single sheet, but why don't we mark that in evi-
dence and I assure you that as to the rest of the application, there
is a portion of it that I wish to read.
Senator McCarthy. I have no objection.
Senator Mundt. It will be entered as an exhibit and given a proper
exhibit number.
(The document referred to was marked as "Exhibit No. 40" and
may be found in the files of the subcommittee.)
Is that all at this time ?
Mr. Welch. At this time ; yes.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen, you are next.
Senator Dirksen. I pass.
Senator Muxdt. Any other Senators to my left or right ?
Senator Jackson. I pass.
Senator Symington. Senator McCarthy, I have a string of ques-
tions here, and I am about half through, and if you would help me
with as short answers as possible, I would appreciate it. I have to
get over to the floor sometime, on the appropriations for Defense.
The next question: Are Senators who are not members of either
of these committees nevertheless entitled, in your opinion, to receive
confidential documents, as authorized persons under the Espionage
2852 SPECIAL mVESTIGATIOISr
Senator McCarthy. As authorized persons under the Espionage
Act?
Senator SniiiNGTON. Right.
Senator McCarthy. I don't think the stamp on the document is
controlling, Senator. I will try and give you short answers, but as
I have said, if John Jones has embezzled $50,000, I don't thmk he
can protect himself by a stamp of secrecy. I don't think that any
information— and again I say I hesitate giving a long answer— but
any information that would disclose the name of informants, in-
vestigative technique, or anything which might in any way endanger
the national security, should not in any way be made public. But
other than that, the American people should have all the information
available. • ^ .•
Senator Symington. Here is one based on your previous testimony.
I would like to be sure I have it in the record. Is the chairman of
the House Un-American Activities Committee in your opinion also
entitled to receive classified documents ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator Symington, the answer is the same.
It isn't a question of the stamp on the document. It is a question of
the information within the document. ^ I
Senator Symington. To be sure I understand, if a man has a classi-
fied document, and believes that in it he can prove wrongdoing of
his superior, has he a right to bring it to the chairman of the Un-
American Activities Committee ?
Senator McCarthy. Not only the right, but the duty if he knows
the superior is guilty of wrongdoing.
Senator Symington. If he thinks his superior is wrong. He may
think it and not know it, right?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. . , tt
Senator Symington. How about the other members of the House
Un-American Activities Committee?
Senator McCarthy. I think under the act of 1912, Senator Syming-
ton, that every man working in Government has a duty to bring the
information of wrongdoing to any Senator, any Congressman.
Senator Symington. Are other Members of the House of Repre-
sentatives also authorized to receive confidential documents?
Senator McCarthy. Pardon ?
Senator Symington. I think, Mr. Cohn, you thought I was going
to mention one. I am not going to mention any individual.
Are other Members of the House of Representatives also author-
ized to receive confidential documents?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, you refer to a confidential document.
Again, may I say— let's stick to this. Any information having to do
with wrongdoing, regardless of how it is classified, any representative
of the people is entitled to have.
Senator Symington. The next question. Do you think that mem- |
bers of the staff of this committe are also authorized to receive confi-
dential documents? -r i j. x
Senator McCarthy. I think that the members of this— I hate to
keep going over and over and over this, but the members of the staff
not only have the right but the duty to get any information which
they can get about any wrongdoing any place in the Government.
Senator Symington. You are talking about all the staff mem-
bers , . ,1 ■ •
Senator McCarthy. Regardless of the particular stamp that is
placed upon the document.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 2853
Senator Symington. Are you talking about all the staff members
or just some?
Senator JMcCarthy. All of the staff members.
Senator Symington. Even those who might not have been cleared ?
Senator McCarthy. When you talk about being cleared, Senator,
as far as I know, no one on my staff has been refused any clearance.
Originally, just by way of explanation, originally we asked for clear-
ance from the Defense Department.
Senator Symington. Let me interrupt you just a minute. I am
only asking for information, and I want to join you in protecting
every member of your staff.
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I might give you this picture: Origi-
nally, I think that I asked for clearance from the Defense Department
for all members of the staff. When we discovered later that, as far
as I know, we were getting no secret material or anything like that
from the Defense Department, the question of clearance hasn't had
much meaning. I, myself, have been satisfied that all members of
my staff are good, honest, decent, loyal Americans.
Senator Symington. I have no cause to doubt that. Senator, but
I would like to ask this : When I was, for example, chairman of the
National Security Resources Board, I was constantly in atomic energy
secrets, and not only myself but my secretary had to have "Q" clear-
ance, which is even higher than top secret.
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Senator Symington. If some member of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission came to a member of this staff who did not have clearance, or
had been refused clearance, do you think that they have the right to
see that information?
Senator McCarthy. Any information of wrongdoing, yes. And,
Senator, could I just take 30 seconds of your time? You and I dis-
cussed m an executive session— and I think you were very right in the
position you took at that time— we discussed the question of whether
or not we should have public hearings on alleged Communist infiltra-
tion of atomic and hydrogen bomb plants. You took the position at
that time, and I think rightly so, that before we made that decision
I should take the matter up with the White House.
Senator Symington. You don't think it was public sessions, do you ?
Senator McCarthy. It was executive session. Without discussing
any of the evidence we have, as you know, I did take it up with some
of the White House aides, with a man from the Justice Department,
with one of our high elected officials in the executive, and I do not
mean President Eisenhower, I say I do not mean President Eisen-
hower, and I was convinced at that time that it would not be in the
national interest at that particular time, and I emphasize that par-
ocular time, to hold any public hearings on atomic energy matters.
The question which you bring up, whether or not there should be
a Q-clearance, I would say this, if we can work out any kind of a
workable arrangement with the Executive whereby he can get infor-
niation which may be classified secret, top secret, then it would be
ot the utmost importance that all members of the staff get clearance
ot some kind, either through atomic energy, Defense Department,
what have you. '
As of now, I have paid very little attention to the clearance. As I
recall, no one has been refused any clearance, but we haven't been
40620°— 54— pt. 09 2
2854 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
o-cttino- secret or top secret material so that the clearance hasn't had
much miijortance. I am sorry if I took too much time.
Senator Symington. I will try to make my point, if I can. In the
executive department, all people ^Yho are cleared for classihed docu-
ments are allowed to see them, and one of the most important things
in the executive branch of the Government is not to allow people who
have not been cleared to see classified information. _ . ^ ,.
Every member of the executive branch is bound by his instructions
and by his oath in respect to that. What worries me about this, and
it is an objective discussion, huvino; nothing to do with personahties ;
what worries me is that apparently from this testimony it is beginning
to appear as if you think the Members of the staff of the^Senate and
Hou«e have a right to classified information which other Government
employees, including members of the military, have not, based on their
orders. t t i v
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I hope I didn t
Senator Syj^iington. If 1 misstated that, correct me.
Senator McCarthy. I hope I didn't give you the wrong impression
on what I said. I have repeated this over and over. That is that all
members of this committee, all members of tlie staff, I think, are en-
titled to every piece of evidence about wrongdoing any place m Gov-
ernment. I think the American people are entitled to that.
Senator, again if I may take another 10 seconds.
Senator Symington. Don't take much more, because my time is
running out. , .-, ■ r\
Senator McCarthy. You and I know there are two theories. One
is that it is a favor to the American people to let them know what is
croincr on here in Washington. The other is that they are entitled to
thatlnformation, that we are their hired men, m effect. I subscribe
to the latter theory. I think they are entitled to know what is
going on. , , . n ^i /-»
I cTon't think, Senator, that you can keep that f rom t.he Congress or
the American people by stamping something '^Classified."
Senator Symington. The next question : Would you think you were
authorized to receive the classified document if the document which
was delivered to you-this is the 21/4 page— had originated m the
Army rather than with the FBI? I presume your answer to that,
based on previous testimony, avouUI be yes. ,, • w
Senator McCarthy. I felt that I was not only authorized to get
that document but I had a duty to act upon the information contained
therein. I did that. As a result of that, as a result of the work ot
the committee, I should say, some 35 people who were then working
in the radar plant are no longer working there.
Senator Symington. The next question: Would it make any dif-
ference if the classified document had borne the Army stamp of Se-
cret" or "Top secret" instead of the FBI classification ot Con-
fidential"? , , 0 J. o •
Senator McCarthy. The stamp on a document. Senator Syming-
ton, to me has no importance whatsoever, because any clerk, any one
of the 2 million clerks in Government, can pick up a stamp marked
"Secret" and rubberstamp a document. . , ^ 1
Senator Symington. Suppose the document required Q clearance
by the Atomic Energy Commission; the answer would be the same,
wouldn't it?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2855
Senator McCarthy. I don't tliink I understand your question.
Senator Symington. Suppose the document had been one which re-
quired Q clearance to see; you would still feel the same way about it,
wouldn't you ?
Senator McCarthy. Senator, we are now talking not about our get-
ting atomic secrets. We are not trying to do that. We are not talk-
ing about getting defense secrets.
Senator Mukdt. The Senator's time has expired. You may con-
clude your answer.
Senator McCarthy. :May I finish this, and if my answer is not
satisfactory, I hope the Senator can ask another question.
Senator, we are not talking here about getting the Nation's secrets.
We are now discussing the right of our committee to get information
showing that people in positions of power are abusing that power, are
dishonest, are serving the Communist cause — period.
Senator Symington. There was a time in the hearing when one of
the members of your staff, as I remember it, said there was Communist
infiltration in atomic energy plants and in hydrogen plants. Actual-
ly, both types of plants would come under the Atomic Energy Com-
mission. The presumption, therefore, would be that, that being true,
there would be information which would be given this committee, and
I don't believe, based on what Mr. Carr said, that you have Q clear-
ance on the committee. If I am wrong about that, correct me.
Senator McCarthy. You are both right and wrong. Senator, in this
respect : That we do not attempt to get atomic and hydrogen secrets.
Our committee does not deal with how the A-bomb or the H-bomb is
manufactured. However, if we find there is evidence that there are
traitors m the A- and H-bomb plants, then we want that informa-
tion. That is the kind of information that, in effect, we specialize
in— graft, corruption, communism, what have you.
Our committee does not look for the military or A- or H-bomb
secrets.
Senator Symington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I think I have
concluded my questioning until the next round.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn, have you any questions ?
Mr. Cohn. Just one or two, if I may.
Senator Mundt. You have 10 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. Don't make this cross-examination too rouffh.
will you ? ^ '
Mr. Cohn. Senator, you testified at page 6247— Mr. Welch referred
you to it this morning— that you had not read Dave Schine's applica-
tion for a commission ; is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct, and that is still my testimony.
^ Mr. Cohn. As we now know from examining it, there is no indica-
tion that you read it or endorsed it or anything else; is that right?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. You have not read it ?
Senator McCarthy. I have not read it. I may say that this noon I
glanced at certain portions of it. That is the first time I have seen it.
Mr. Cohn. In any event, you are not familiar with the contents of
the application ?
Senator McCarthy. I am not.
Mr. Cohn. No further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes.
2§56 SPECIAL INVESTIGATIOIT
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, in reference to G. David Schine's
application -i • ^ i at
Senator McCarthy. I don't tlnnk your mike is turned on, Mr.
Welcli. I can't hear you.
Mr. Welch. We are all right now, I think.
Senator McCarthy. Yes. ,. -, n . , ^
Mr. Welch. I think you have a copy or did at least have a copy o±
G. David Schine's application for a commission at your desk today.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn had a copy, I think
Mr CoHN. Somebody from Mr. Welch's staff asked me to return it.
Senator McCarthy. I think that has been returned to you.
Mr. Welch. In any event, for my purposes it is satisfactory it 1
read a portion .f it which reflects his experience. w i i »
Senator McCarthy. Could I follow that as you read it, Mr. Welch?
I may say, Mr. Welch, that I don't think that you read badly or incor-
rectly, but this mornincr I made the statement that if you said I had
si^-ned the application, I would take your word for that You were of i
tlfe opinion I had at that time. I made the mistake of not checking
the application. For that reason, I would like to check what we read.
What page are you reading from ? n ■, u a t ^•
Mr Welch. I am reading item 36, something headed "Application
for Appointment in the Officers Keserve Corps," which is the first
sheet It should be the top sheet of what you have before you. i hat
is on the second page, a block of typewriting. Do you observe that ^
Senator McCarthy. Just 1 second.
Mr. Welch. Beginning with the words "When I was 17 (
Senator McCarthy. I have that.
Mr. Welch. Have you it, sir?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
Wheu I was 17, I joined the U. S. Naval Maritime Reserve, wliicli at
that time had a 1-year training program followed by sea duty, and I was a
mrdshipman, inactive, for several months. When I reported at San Francisco
lo b .gin training, I discovered that the program had been engthened to 4 years
and I volunteeml for immediate sea duty in the Army Transpor Service I
^^n^ accepted and served as transportation officer in the Transportation Office.
Duties were to help handle all ships' business such as payroll, requisitions,
customs, immigrations and health matters, voyage repairlists, personnel and
property, etc. While in the Army Transport Service, I made several voyages as
a ships officer with rank of lieutenant to such places as Japan, I^^^^ea Philip-
pines, Hawaii, Panama, and Germany. Service extended from June 1946 to
June 1047. Psychological ware—
w-a-r-e, but I take that to mean war-
Psychological warfare is my field.
Do you agree that should be the meaning of it, Senator?
Senate? McCarthy. I think that most likely should be "Psycholog-
ical warfare." „^ , -, • ^ p
Mr. Welch. I think it must mean "Psychological warfare is my
field— also business and management." .
I notice in that typewriting a reference to voyages as ships otticer
with rank of lieutenant. You have on occasion spoken m this rooni
of the rank of "simulated lieutenant," or some similar phrase, is that
correct, Senator? - u • -i i. j
Senator T^IcCarthy. I think the correct phrase is "assimilated
rank." Is that correct ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2857
Mr. Welch. "Assimilated" or "simulated" ?
Senator McCarthy. Assimilated, a-s-s-i-m-i — don't ask me to
spell it.
Mr. Welch. In any event, you do not understand that Mr. Scliine
had a quote, rank of lieutenant, unquote while in that service, do you?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I do, Mr. Welch. He apparently had the
rank of lieutenant in the Army Transportation Service. Keep in
mind tliat all I know about this is what I have heard.
Mr. Welch. Did you ever hear that one of the difficulties about his
being commissioned was that it turned out that he actually didn't
have a rank of lieutenant ? Did you ever hear that, sir?
Senator McCarthy. No, I did not.
Mr. Welch. Also I was interested — some days ago you said some-
thing about G. David Schine linking him in some way with Korea.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. Welch. I read here that he was on a ship which made voyages to
such places as Ja})an, Korea, Philippines, Hawaii, Panama, and Ger-
many. Were you basing what you said about G. David Schine in re-
spect to Korea on what is stated in this paragraph ?
Seantor McCarthy. No. AVhat Dave told me — and I made it very
clear to you the other day that he did not serve in the Korean war. I
told you he was over there in the Army Transport Service some
period of time before the war, and there was no question, I am sure,
in any one's mind about that. If you will check the record I made it
very clear.
Mr. Welch. I don't think you intended to convey the impression
that he fought in the Korean war and I am not suggesting that you
did.
Senator McCarthy. I made it very clear. Positively I made the
statement that he had not served in the Korean war.
Mr. Welcil And the only connection with Korea that G. David
Schine had as far as you know, and I know, was his occasional landing
there when he was on this transport business?
Senator McCarthy. As a lieutenant in the Army Transport Service.
Mr. Welch. I want now just to direct your attention to 2 or 3
places in the record, having to do with the matters that have been under
discussion so heavily this morning, and see if we cannot close the refer-
ences to this matter with what I now wish to call to your attention.
In volume 10, at page 1880
Senator McCarthy. Just 1 minute, volume 10, page 1880? Yes, sir,
Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welcpl Where your name first appears:
Senator McCarthy.
And the phrase in the first sentence is —
I did not —
I drop down three lines and read your testimony :
I will never put Mr. Hoover in the position of either saying "Yes" or "No" as to
whether I should make use of this material. I don't think he would want to be
put in that position. I have never discussed with him —
and I don't mean to skip it. I will go to your last sentence —
I have used my own judgment and the ones that I thought should be used I have
used.
There is no doubt that that is a correct statement of your position, is
it, Senator ?
2858 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. That is a correct statement, I think.
Mr. Welch. And, again, in another volume, which is volume 11, at
page 2040
Senator McCarthy. Would you hold it just a minute?
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Welch?
Senator Mundt. Time back in.
Mr. Welch. Page 2040, the second paragraph on the page, I read
you the first five lines :
I don't think that a congressional committee is bound — if I may have the
Chair's attention — I don't think that any congressional committee is bound by the
opinion of anyone in the executive as to whether or not they are entitled to certain
information.
That remains your stand today, I am sure ; does it not ?
Senator McCarthy. You are correct.
Mr. Welch. And on page 3085 of the record, in volume 18
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. Volume what, Mr. Welch?
Mr. Welch. Volume 18.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Welch ?
Senator Mundt. Start the clock.
Mr. Welch. About 6 lines down, the first long answer, and I will
read only the first 2 lines :
Senator McCarthy. May I say that I don't think this committee is bound by
any letter from the Attorney General.
That represented your view then and now, does it not ?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. One more point in this connection. I think it would
be helpful if we had in the record the oath of office that a military
officer signs on joining the military forces and being assigned to the
Pentagon.
Senator McCarthy. I would have no objection to that.
Mr. Welch. It is short. [Reading :]
I having been appointed an oflBcer in the Army of the United States,
as indicated above, in the grade of do solemnly swear that I will sup-
port and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic ; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same ;
that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservations ov purposes
of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the oflace
upon which I am about to enter, so help me God.
There are, therefore, three things that he says he will do: First,
that he will support and defend the Constitution ; secondly, that he
will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and, thirdly, that he
will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which
he is about to enter.
You and I understand. Senator, and we have differing views about
it, and the effect of it, but you and I understand that the pinch, as
I view it, comes in the last part of his oath, where he says he will
well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which he
is about to enter. It is at that point that the legends that appear on
FBI documents, making them confidential or secret, may confront
this officer, and he, under his oath of office, must obey the orders of his
superior as to whether or not he reveals those documents, is that cor-
rect, sir ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2859
Senator McCarthy. You are incorrect, ISIr. Welch, in this, that
our mihtary established the doctrine in the Nuremberg trials that no
man could use an illegal order as a defense for an illegal act. In
other words, the fact that you were obeying an order of a superior
was established during our trials of the war criminals established
as no defense
Senator Mundt. The time of Mr. Welch has expired. You may
conclude your answer.
Senator McCarthy. INIay I finish answering this.
That was very definitely established. That rule was followed, Mr.
Welch, during all of the trials.
If I may repeat, that no matter what order a superior officer gave
you, if it asked you to perform an illegal act, you could not use that
as a defense in a trial. Therefore, that must apply as of today be-
cause we have never changed that. And which means that if some-
one in the military knows of treason, espionage. Communist infiltra-
tion, there is no order of any superior which can justify his refusing
to give that information to the proper officials.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins, any question at this time?
Mr. Jenkins. Pass, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will pass.
Senator McClellan ?
Senator McClellan. Senator, look to paragraph 12 of your docu-
ment, please, sir.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Senator.
Senator Mundt. Time back in.
Senator McClellan. I read the first sentence in it :
The belated and gratuitous attempt to include Frank Carr in the smear by
alleging in the latest Welch document that Mr. Carr sought preferential treat-
ment for Private Schine, is dishonest.
I call your attention to the word "dishonest." Did you mean it
when you said it then and do you mean it now ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. That is hardly the act of an honest man and
a man of integrity, is it. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I think, Senator McClellan, that the inclusion
of Frank Carr with no evidence whatsoever against him, was one of
the foulest things I have seen done for a long time.
Luckily we have a good jury who has seen that there is no evidence
against him.
I want to make it clear. Senator McClellan, that I don't know who is
responsible for this. The final moving factor, the man who signed
the document, is Mr. Welch. I assume he got his information from
someone else, I assume as any lawyer he relied upon that informa-
tion, but who gave him this information I don't know.
I want to make it clear that I am not accusing Mr. Welch of dis-
honesty here. He was brought into this case as an attorney to try an
extremely difficult case, if I may say that, and I just assume that
he took the facts as given to him.
Senator McClellan. Wlioever gave him the facts are the ones we
would hold responsible, I should think.
Senator McUabthy. Eight. Yes, sir.
2860 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McClellan. -Whoever gave him those facts committed
an act of dishonesty
Senator McCarthy. There is no question about that.
Senator McClf.llan. According to your allegation.
Senator McCarthy. There is no question about that. We have
all the evidence in now, and there has been nothing proven against
Mr. Carr except that he was silent upon occasion, and I am not sure
that that is a crime.
Senator McClellan. We have some others where "dishonest" is
used without reference to Mr. Carr. I mention that one simply to
keep the record straight and to discuss the record.
I call your attention now to your paragraph 14:
The recently contrived attempt to direct fire at the chairman and to accuse
him of attempting to secure special treatment for Private Schine is branded
as false by the reference to the written record and to the prior Stevens-Adams
report itself.
If that is false, you would hardly construe that to be the act of an
honest man and a man of integrity, would you?
Senator McCarthy. No. I think Senator Symington said there
was no question about this — Senator McClellan, I am sorry.
Senator McClellan. What can I do to help you
Senator McCarthy. It is entirely improper and entirely dishonest.
I think the charges were filed for the purpose which they accom-
plished, namely, calling off our investigation of those who are protect-
ing Communists.
Senator McClellan. Senator, in order to absolve Mr. Welch now,
those charges were made in that memorandum of chronological
events before Mr. Welch got in the case, were they not?
Senator McCarthy. I neither absolve Mr. Welch nor charge him
with anything. I don't know. I know nothing about what part Mr.
Welch took in this. I may say that I was a bit disappointed in Mr.
Welch as a lawyer when the case of Mr. Adams and Mr. Stevens was
in and he was asked by one of the Senators whether he would agree
that the case against Mr. Carr had fallen, and he refused to say yes.
Again, I don't want to attribute any dishonest motives. He "has a
client. He may have had to do that.
Senator McClellan. If you don't, let's get back to the question,
then. I simply asked you if this wasn't contained in the chronological
document prior to the time that Mr. Welch entered the case.
Senator McCarthy. I think Me would have to refer to that docu-
ment, Senator. I would rather not try to tell you what was in it.
Senator McClellan. Wasn't there an accusation in that document
about the special treatment of Private Schine? We know that, don't
we, without looking back at it?
Senator McCarthy. I am sure that was in the document. I can't
recall the wording.
Senator McClellan. Mr. Welch was not in the case at that time?
Senator McCarthy. Apparently not.
Senator McClellan. That is right.
Now we go on to No. 16, if we may, sir. I read the last sentence of
that paragraph :
Secretary Robert T. Stevens then communicated with the chairman and com-
menced a series of efforts to interfere with the investigation, to stop hearings,
and to prevent various of his appointees from being called by the subcommittee.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2861
You have testified already that that is true and that the Secretary
and Mr. Adams did undertake to interfere with the committee's in-
vestigation. Is that correct ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, except I think to have the record straight,
we talk about appointees, we are talking about appointees of the
Secretary of the Army. I frankly don't know which of those ap-
pointees were INIr. Stevens' personal appointees and which ones were
carryovers.
Senator McClellan. I didn't refer to that. It wouldn't matter
whether they w^ere carryovers or immediate acquisitions, he was
trying to prevent them from testifying, wasn't he?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator McClellan. So that charge is a charge that you now main-
tain is true?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. Wouldn't you say if it is true, that it is highly
improper ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I think the
Senator McClellan. And was not the act of an honest, patriotic
Secretary of the Army ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't like to go into the question of Bob
Stevens' patriotism. Let me say this in fairness to Bob Stevens, if I
may. I don't like these — I have been admonishing my staff to make
short answers, and I have been making longer than they have. I
have had a lot of experience, a lot of contact with Bob Stevens. I feel
that he was, No. 1, trying to do a good job as Secretary of the Army.
Up until the Zwicker incident and until this was issued, I knew of
nothing I could consider dishonest in his record. He appeared to be
trying to give us full cooperation while we were digging out indi-
vidual Communists.
I do know that something happened when we tried to get the names
of those responsible for the Zwicker coddling and tried to get the
old loyalty board before the committee to find'out why they sent men
with Commuinst records back to the radar plant. 1 doii't want to
say that Bob Stevens is not patriotic and not honest. I would say
this, m conclusion: I think Secretary Stevens has had the experience
that perhaps a number of people have had. He came to Washington,
a businessman, no background in politics, no experience down here,
and just couldn't cope with the rather rough brand of politics played
m Washington. In that connection, may I say that it appears now,
as Senator Symington knows, that Mr. Clark Clifford, the adviser of
the Democrat Party, was advising him.
I think Senator Symington make a mistake in getting Clark Clif-
ford to do that. He and I would differ. I assume Senator Syming-
ton felt that maybe it was a great service to his party if he could use
his political adviser to steer the course of Mr. Stevens. I feel it was
a grave error. I think it was a disservice to both parties, but I am
not accusing Senator Symington of any improper motives. I assume
he thought he was doing something extremely clever at the time, but
I don t think it was.
Senator McClellan. Senator, I thought
Senator McCarthy. I am not sure if I answered you.
Senator McClellan. I don't think you have.
46620°— 54— pt. 69 3
2862 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I can't go into Bob Stevens' mind.
Senator McClellan. I know you can't.
Senator I^IcCarthy. I think someone guided him. Two days be-
fore the charges were made he very honestly and very frankly stated
that there is nothing to these charges. Two days later he made them.
I think it is highly improper— period.
Senator McClellan. Senator, look at the date of this. I asked
you about it. September 7, 1953, when he commenced all the action.
And when you started off on this little diversionary dissertation, I
thoua:ht you were pinpointing the chicken luncheon, the memorandum-
of-aiTreement luncheon, wlion there were just a group of Republican
polidcians present and Mr. Stevens was in their tender and solicitous
care. Were you?
Senator iMcCARTHY. I might say we got along very well when we
had those four Republicans present. We agreed on the few thmgs
that I think you and I could agree on now, Senator, namely that the
committee was entitled to have witnesses come before it, that we are
entitled to information about wrongdoing. It was a very simple
agreement. I may say that after he called you, Senator, following
that meeting and after he called Senator Symington, now when I
read those monitored phone calls I begin to understand that my Demo-
crat friends were not exactly concerned with any harmony or coop-
eration between Bob Stevens and this committee.
Senator McCleei.a.n. You wouldn't say I wasn't cooperating and
trying to be a friend to him wlien I told him he should have known
better than to cet in there with that gang, do you?
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired.
Senator McCarthy. Let me read what the Senator said.
Senator Mundt. You may answer the question. The time has
expired. , i i •
Senator McCarthy. He is advising the Secretary about how he. is
to handle McCarthy, and I am not saying this is bad advice, but it
is not exactly indicating that we were having too much harmony.
"Beat him to the punch." I wasn't punching Bob. Also we have
here— where is it Avhere he says get out of the gang. Senator McClel-
lan says, "I never was so surprised when you got off over there in
that gang without anybody with you. Of course they told you they
wanted to work things out."
I may say, Senator, I think if my good Democrat friends on the
committee had not been advising Secretary Stevens that, it would be
investigating Communists as of today instead of investigating the
Senator McClellan. We didn't give him that advice until after he
called on us. He got into the mess before he came to us. We could
have kept him out if you had sent him a little sooner.
Senator Mundt. The time has expired.
Senator McCarthy. ^May I say to the Senator in answer to that
question, apparently the contact was made by Senator McClellan 5
days before he came back to the committee. The Senator came back
on the committee
Senator McClellan. Senator, you were advised of that contact be-
fore I went back on the committee, weren't you, by me, in the Repub-
lican cloakroom of the Senate?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2863
Senator McCarthy. I think I was, John.
Senator McClellan. Thank you.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, I am glad our esteemed friend
from Arkansas came to the Republican cloakroom for a little gospel.
But, Mr. Chairman, this is the 35th day of the hearings, and I so
earnestly hope that it can be completed today. I think I would feel a
little remiss in my duty if, in the course of these long hearings, I did
not raise at least one point of order. If memory serves me correctly,
I have not in all this time, availed myself of that privilege. But I
raise a point of order, Mr. Chairman, today, only for purposes of
clarification of the record.
Certainly, in any litigation, if there is something that should be
ignored by the jury, the court so charges the jury to do so. Now,
frankly, in all the discussion, and I must confess my own violation of
the rule in that connection, about the so-called 214-page document,
I felt from the outset that it was irrelevant to the issue that is before us,
and, as such, testimony on that subject should be ignored entirely. I
think the only way we can clarify the record is at this point, certainly,
to ask the opinion of the counsel of this committee, who was hired for
that purpose, and who is a very distinguished lawyer, and in whose
legal capacity I have the greatest confidence.
So, Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise the question now as to the
relevancy of all the evidence and testimony on the 214-page document,
and I solicit the opinion of the counsel at this point in the record
with respect to that document.
Senator Mundt. The Chair, of course, would be glad to hear the
counsel as he always is.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I regret very much that my friend
the Senator from Illinois did not raise that question approximately a
month ago. I want to be perfectly frank and say, and I say it without
any thought of criticism of any member of the committee, any counsel
or any party in interest, that in my opinion, long, long ago we let
clown all the bars insofar as evidence is concerned pertaining to the
issues of this controversy. The issues are well defined. I agree with
some of the Senators who suggested this morning that perhaps it is
a fine thing and a fine thing insofar as the public is concerned, to have
injected these new issues in this controversy since it began, and par-
ticularly to point out, and as has been said, illuminate certain con-
stitutional questions which cannot and will not be decided by this
subcommittee, but which I feel were long ago fully exploited and
illuminated, and which I emphasize are in no wise a part of the issues
of this controversy and again emphasize that the fact that they have
been made issues meets with my full approval. I believe it was the
Senator from Missouri this morning who stated that in his opinion,
that would be one of the salutary results of this investigation, and
I heartily endorse that statement, Senator.
Passing on the specific question raised by my distinguished friend
from Illinois, I do say that the question of the 214-page document is
not relevant. I feel that it has been fully and thoroughly exploited.
If I may be presumptuous enough to do so, I should like to suggest
that at this point, we close the door on any further inquiry insofar as
that nonrelevant issue is concerned.
Senator Jackson. May I speak to that point of order ?
2864 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson wants to be heard on the point
of order.
Senator Jackson. It comes as an amazing thing to me that we are
o-oino- to start to enforce the rules of relevancy on the last afternoon
of tlie hearing. I have been in a lot of trials, but I have never heard
of a rule that makes relevancy retroactive over several weeks. I
would say that if we are going to enforce the rules of relevancy, Mr.
Chairman, there has been a lot of what the lawyers call laches and I
am amazed to find that, as we close this afternoon, we are going to
start enforcing the rules of relevancy. I want to say this, and just
let me finish, we will be here for many more weeks going through the
record to take out the irrelevant material in the record. Now, let's
be logical. Let's be consistent about it. I mean if we are going to
enforce now the rules of relevancy, we will have to go through and
delete an awful lot of material. I think the counsel will agree with
me on that. ttt i • ^
Senator Dirksex. Mr. Chairman, if my friend from VVaslimgton
had paid careful attention to the language, I don't think he would have
raised that question, for two reasons : In the first place, I asked only
for a ruling as to whether or not that information was relevant, be-
cause it is necessary for this committee to prepare a report, and the
question is whether it is going to be considered as a relevant issue
having direct and proximate bearing upon the issues before us.
The^second thing is that counsel did not suggest the enforcement of
the rule witli respect to relevancy ; he merely suggested that he hoped
that perhaps the door would be closed. I would be the last, at this
stage of the proceeding, to ask that the rule on relevancy be enforced,
because the door has been opened as wide as a 40-acre field, and prob-
ably that proposition would come with somewhat dubious grace at
this late hour, and the junior Senator from Illinois would be the last
to ask that it be enforced.
Senator Jackson. May I respond ? , , -,i i
Senator Mundt. The Chair is prepared to rule, but he will hear
the Senator from Washington.
Senator Jackson. It was my understanding that the document was
introduced by Senator McCarthy to establish the time when the hear-
ings got underway with reference to the Army. I think it is highly
retevant. it goes to one of the key issues in the controversy whether
the hearings on the investigation into the Army started in the spring,
April, May, or whether they started after the application for the
commission bv Mr. Schine.
Now, I think the whole point of its introduction was to establish the
fact that the investigation of the Army had been underway for quite
sometime. t i o j
Senator Mundt. The Chair is prepared to rule, and the Senator
from Washington has taken the words of the Chair's ruling literally
out of his mouth. The Chair's memory corresponds precisely with
that of Senator Jackson as to the reason why the two-and-a-quartcr-
page document was first brought into the committee room by Senator
McCarthy. I think its introduction certainly is relevant. Nobody
would deny that some of the discussion that followed the introduc-
tion has been irrelevant, but we are all in agreement there has been
much irrelevant discussion during these hearings, due to the fact
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2865
that they have broadeiied to incUide a collateral controversy "as to the
authority of various branches of the Government.
I agree with our counsel, that I think that discussion has been
illuminating, I think it has been helpfid. I agree with Senator
Symington, I think it has been fruitful and constructive, because it
points toward the future as to what we are all going to have to wrestle
with in the months and the years ahead.
And so the Chair Avill have to respectfully decline the final part
of counsel's suggestion, and Avill not arbitrarily rule out any further
discussion which flows along that line, because I think by now it
has become embedded in the testimony and in the discussion of the
controversial points before us.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, I just note an exception for the
record. I just note an exception for tlie record to the Chair's rulinir
and let it stand at that, because I am confident we will be discussing
it at a later date.
Senator Mundt. You are quite correct, and there are a great many
itenis of testimony, Senator Dirksen. which certainly are goino- to
be irrelevant to the ultimate findings which we are called "upon to
make in our report.
I think none of us expect to bring into this report, whether we
have, as the Chair has suggested, perhaps too optimistically at times,
a single-package report to which we can all agree, or whether we
have 2 reports, or perhaps even more than 2 reports, I think that
none of us is going to endeavor individually or collectively to adjudi-
cate the lines of autliority which we expect to have folloAved both
by the executive and by investigating committees in the future.
Is that all. Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dirksen. Yes.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson, 10 minutes.
Senator Jackson. Senator McCarthy, I wanted to say that I think
the advice that Senator McClellan gave was pretty sound advice. I
have the feeling that it may not always be too wise to exclude us
out of everything. Maybe it was wise for us that we did not get into
that chicken luncheon.
Just 1 or 2 questions that I want to straighten out. I may have
misunderstood your testimony.
I had understood you to say that you felt that all of the staff, that
is, the investigators, lawyers, and so on— I am not talking about
stenographers in particular at the moment — that all of the staff dicl
not need clearance because you are not handling secret material, or
something to that effect. Was that the substance of your earlier
statement ?
Senator McCarthy. To answer the first part of your question,
Senator Jackson, you comment upon the fact that you thought we
should have included you in the meeting with Secretary Stevens.
May I say, and I want to make it very, very clear now but I don't
want to start a hassle here on the last day of the hearing — I think it
was very, very unfortunate for the country that my three Democrat
friends came back on the committee. If 'they had not, I think we
would be investigating Communists today instead of wasting all of
our time and money here investigating charges that have ''proven
completely false. Since my Democrat friends came back, as you
know, I leaned over backward to give you evervthine you wanted.
2866 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
When you came back we thought you were coming back to help us.
I find now that is not true. I think there is no doubt in anyone's
mind about the fact that my three Democrat friends here will have a
report— I could write that report for them, I believe, right now. I
know what they are going to say. I think they decided that before
the hearing started.
The second half of your question was
Senator Jackson. Wait a minute.
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to.
Senator Jackson. Let me answer you.
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to.
Senator Jackson. Isn't it a fact, Senator, that the members on the
Democratic side left the committee over the right to vote on the
assignment of staff members? That was July 10. All of the matter
of this investigation relates to that period about a day or two after
we left the committee up until we returned. Isn't that what is
involved? • • .i i.
Senator I^IcCarthy. No, Senator, you are not giving the correct
picture of that. ^Yhi]e my Democrat friends were absent, we held
a vast number of hearings. We got rid of a great number of Com-
munists— let me finish. . ,
Senator Jackson. I am talking about the investigation we are dis-
cussing here. All the trouble we have had over these incidents all
took pTace while the Democrats were not on the committee. Isn't that
corrGct ?
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish my question. Could I have that
chart over there? Let me finish my answer.
Mr. Jackson, while the Democrats were off the committee, we were
investigating Communists. We find now that 6 days or 5 days before
you came back on the committee, someone advised Mr. Adams to go
and talk to the ranking Democrat member. We found that he came
back on the committee. We found that Senator McClellan— I am
sorry. Senator Symington— got the chief political adviser of the Dem-
ocrat Party, who succeeded in disrupting things, misadvising Bob
Stevens. „ ... o i.
The result is that all of the funds voted for our committee, Senator
Jackson, are being dissipated in this investigation, which everyone
knows is a complete farce, instead of investigating communism.
I am very, very much disapjwinted. I am disturbed about the
future of the committee. If mv three Democrat friends take the posi-
tion in the future that they liave taken since they got back on the
committee, it means it will be almost impossible for us to dig out
any subversives.
To answer the second half of your question——
Senator Jackson. Let me finish that part of it.
Senator McCarthy. Certainly. ,
Senator Jackson. Your own countercharges relate to incidents that
took place during all this period between July 10 and the latter
part of January, when we returned. Soinethmg must have been
croinjT on while "we were off. Isn't that what we are investigating
li6rG ?
Senator :McCarthy. Senator Jackson, if you have listened to the
testimony, as I testified, there was an attempt on the part of Mr.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2867
Stevens and on the part of Mr. Adams to try and induce us to call off
the hearing. I have testified and Mr. Colin has testified, I believe,
that there is nothing unusual about that ; that the head of any bureau
normally doesn't want his bureau to be investigated.
However, it was only after the Secretary of the Army got in contact
with the Democrats, who then were not on the committee, who came
back on the committee — it was only after he did that that these
fraudulent charges were issued.
I am not saying the Democrats were responsible for these fraudu-
lent charges. All I know is that they were issued after the Secretary
had foisted upon him the chief political adviser of the Democrat
Party.
Senator Jacksox. I am surprised, Senator, you are not pressing for
a subpena of Mr. Clifford.
Senator McCarthy. I bring this up because of your comment.
Senator Jackson. I am surprised you are not pressing for the
subpena of Mr. Clifl'ord.
We Democrats tried to help you, you know, get that witness up here
for you, and the first day you requested immediate subpena for Mr.
Clifford, and I haven't heard a word about it since.
Senator McCarthy. I assume you want an answer to that.
S^'nator Jackson, you know I made it very clear that to call Mr.
Clifford who is a lawyer, who can claim the lawyer's privilege, with-
out Senator Symington taking the stand would be a great waste of
time. I made it clear I am not going to ask for Senator Symington
being subpenaed. I think under the Constitution he cannot be. I
think it would be a great contribution here, however, if we could get
Senator Symington to come on the stand, and my very good friend
here, John McClellan. I am curious to know what that conversation
was 5 days before he came back on the committee.
Senator McClellan. Do you want to hear it ^ I will tell you.
Senator McCarthy. I would only like to hear it under oath, John.
I would only like to hear it under oath, not thjiJ: I question your truth-
fulness, but the rest of it was taken — I can't see you Avith the photog-
I'aphers between. I wonder if you would move.
I don't question. Senator, your veracity, but the rest of us have taken
tlie oath and I frankly am very curious about the conversation that
you had, the conversation which Senator Symington had. Just what
is behind all of this?
Senator McClellan. We get quite curious sometimes. When you
hold these chicken luncheons and then say the fellow came crawling
to you on his belly, I get curious about it.
Senator McCarthy. Senator McClellan, that statement is com-
pletely false.
Senator McClellan. All right, if you say it is false.
Senator McCarthy. There was a statement made here, I think it
was a quote from some magazine to the effect that I said that Stevens
came crawling on his belly. That is completely false.
Senator McClellan. All right.
Senator McCarthy. There is nothing to it. Mr. Stevens — and the
other Eepublicans who were present know it — had a very friendly
conversation witli us. We made an agreement. I should not say an
agreement. We all agreed that the investigating committee was en-
2868 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
titled to certain information. There is nothing new about that.
Apparently after that meeting something happened. I don't know
what. I think maybe, Senator, you and Senator Symington could
shed some light on that.
Senator McClellan. There have been a lot of things happened
after the Democrats were off the committee, hasn't there, and that is
what we are investigating now?
Senator McCarthy. No. We are investigating now — Senator Mc-
Clellan, it has been proven now that the charges against Mr. Carr
are false. It has been proven that the only thing Mr. Cohn has done
according to the testimony of Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams was that
he couldn't get me to refuse to call the members of the loyalty board.
Mr. Cohn did not try to do it. If he tried, we would not have suc-
ceeded. So as of now we know the charges are completely fraudulent.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson, you have the floor.
Senator Jackson. To get away from the luncheon for a minute, the
chicken luncheon, Senator, I had understood you to say — and if I am
wrong I want to be corrected — in your testimony earlier this after-
noon that you didn't feel that all of the staff need to have clearance.
I wondered if you testified to that.
Senator McCarthy. I didn't say that. Senator.
Senator Jackson. Will you straighten that out?
Senator McCarthy. I said I asked the FBI for a full field investiga-
tion of everyone on the staff. I said that they have given me what
is known as a name check of the members of the staff. I said that
originally I felt that perhaps a clearance from the Atomic Energy
Commission or from the Pentagon might be of importance while it
appeared that we were going to be able to get information from them.
Since I have discovered we cannot get information from them — for
example, CIA refused to cooperate at all — there is no sense in trying
to ask for any clearance from those organizations. If we can work
out some kind of an arrangement whereby this committee can get the
necessary information, from the various departments, then I think
those departments should have the right to object to any member of
the staff who is not cleared.
Senator Jackson. You will recall that I made a motion in the com-
mittee in executive session
Senator McCarthy. You did.
Senator Jackson. Requesting a full field investigation of all the
staff personnel, if that is possible.
Senator McCarthy. You did.
Senator Jackson. And, if not, a clearance from whatever other
agency that we could obtain.
Senator McCarthy. You moved that we have a full field investiga-
tion by the FBI.
Senator Jackson. Do I understand that a request was made of the
Department of Defense for clearance of staff personnel ?
Senator IMcCarthy. Senator Jackson, I am sure that originally we
made those requests. I don't think we made any such requests over
the past 4 or 5 months, since this thing has been called on.
Senator Jackson. I am talking about the past. Have they all been
acted upon ? That is what I am getting at.
Senator McCarthy. As far as I know, none of them have been
turned down.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2869
Senator Jackson. Have they all received clearance?
Senator McCakthy. I don't^ know.
Senator Jackson. Could we have that information ?
Senator McCarthy. You certainly can.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, on that point, I think the material that
was requested is now available. I miderstood Senator Symington
to say that he wished it presented in executive session.
Senator Mundt. I think that is correct.
:Mr. Welch. That being true, I have a report in writing which I
propose to hand to the chairman for such use as you wish to make
but I think Colonel Murray on my left would like to make a comment
about the addition or substraction of names from it, purely mechanical
m nature.
Senator Mundt. Without objection, the committee will hear from
Colonel Murray at this time.
_ Mr. Welch. 'Is that right, Colonel Murray? We don't wish any
information on any particular men. I just want to be sure that the
chairman understands what he is getting.
Senator Muxdt. The Chair understood Senator Syminoton's re-
quest for it to be presented in executive session, because Senator Sym-
ington said he had no intention of trying to discredit or smear any-
body that applied for a job and was turned down.
Senator Jackson. Applied for a clearance, you mean.
Senator ]\ruNDT. That is correct.
Colonel Murray. I have the material that you requested in two lists •
two sej^arate letters, both dated today, from the Office of the Secretary
of Deiense. And I have been authorized to present it to the chairman
o± this committee. The reason it is on two separate letters is because
when we did not receive the list of employees, we worked with an
older list.
Senator McCarthy. Wait just a minute. You received a list of the
employees as I told you you would, during the noon hour.
Colonel Murray. Yes, sir. We did not receive it when we requested
It, and I was anxious to get this as soon as possible, so I initiated a
request upon the Department.
Senator McCarthy. Let's have the record clear. I told you I would
give j-pu the list during the noon hour. You got it during the noon
hour, IS that right ? ^
Colonel Murray. Yes, sir; during the noon hour. But we had
already initiated work m order to produce this today. There were two
names on the list that Senator McCarthy presented to Mr Welch
that were not on our original list. That is why we have a supplemen-
tary list. There was one name on the list that we prepared that was
not on Senator McCarthys list. I presume it probably was somebody
that was employed back m December that is not with you now sir
Senator McCarthy. Just so the list is complete, I think you m'ight
hnd that on that list, there should be one more name added to it
i didnt check the list personally, but there is a young man by the
name of Ernie Ableman who is on my personal payroll who works
for the committee. By "personal payroll," I mean my office payroll
I am not sure his name is on there, so it should be added.
Colonel Murray. His name is not on either of these lists.
2870 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. That should be added, if it is not there. He
is not on the staff payroll.
Mr. Welch. Then, Mr. Chairman, if it meets with your approval
and anyone else who is interested, I will hand these lists to you now
or have them lianded to you, which, coupled with the testimony of this
witness, I think, makes the situation clear, and they can be dealt with
by the committee in executive or other sessions as you see fit.
Senator Mundt. Thank you very much. The Chair will accept
them. We will call an executive session to present them to the
members of the committee.
(Document handed.)
Senator Mundt. Who has the time ? Have you concluded, Senator
Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. That is all for now. It was a long 10 minutes.
Senator Mundt. Yes. Well, we took time out for the interruptions.
Senator Symington ?
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I should have made a point
of something way back when Senator McClellan and Senator Mc-
Carthy had their colloquy. I would like to just make a couple of
observations and then continue with the list of questions which I have,
and which I am nearly through with.
The first is that, as I testified in executive session, before getting
the lawyer whose name has been bandied about here quite a little,
I tried to get Mr. Bill Rogers, former chief counsel of this com-
mittee, and he was not available. I wouldn't have been any better
off, though, if I had gotten him, because, as I read the
Senator McCarthy. You have answered
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, may I continue ? I have been
very patient and quiet all day.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington has the floor.
Senator Symington. As I read the development we all remember
as kids, at least all who are old men like me, "Tinkers to Evers to
Chance," a great Chicago infield, this goes "Stevens to Adams to
Hensel to Sherman Adams and Bill Rogers to Clifford to the chicken
dinner." So if I had gotten a Republican lawyer, I wouldn't have
been any better off and I would have probably been just as severely
criticized.
It does happen, however, as I also testified in executive session,
that the last time that Mr. Clifford talked to Mr. Stevens, which,
incidentally, was the second time he ever talked to him, was on
February 21, and that was days before the chicken dinner, and weeks
before the issuance of any charges.
Now, it seems to me that there has been a little too much made out
about this Democratic lawyer accepting the request of the Republican
Secretary of the Army to help him with respect to a problem that
involved Army morale. It seems to me that the Senator now on
the witness stand during these hearings has had considerable help
from another Democratic lawyer, and I say I see nothing wrong
in that.
Now, Mr. Chairman, may I proceed to my questions? I will try
to get them through this round.
Senator Mundt. We will be happy to hear you.
Senator Symington. Senator McCarthy, do you think President
Eisenhower could put any classification on a secret document which
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2871
would prevent you from being a person authorized to receive and
examine it?
Senator McCarthy. I will answer that, but first let me say that I
have gotten some information that I have been longing for for many
long days, and that was who it was that recommended Bill Rogers to
give advice, especially after he was at that January 21 meeting. I
thank you for that information. Senator Symington.
Senator Symington. The Senator is totally incorrect. What I said
was that I tried to get hold of Bill Rogers without success. If any-
body recommended him to look into your problems, it was not I, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Your question M^as, does Mr. Eisenhower have
what?
Senator Symington. President Eisenhower, sir.
Senator McCarthy. President Eisenhower have what?
Senator Symington. May I repeat the question.
Senator McCarthy. If you will, sir.
Senator Symington. Do you think that President Eisenhower could
put any classification on a secret document which could prevent you
from being a person authorized to receive and examine it ?
Senator McCarthy. T guess the answer is "Yes" or "No."
Senator Symington. Well, if that is the answer, that is the answer.
Next question : Do you think the FBI could have any documents
which you as the chairman of this committee should not be entitled to
receive ?
Senator McCarthy. Oh, certainly.
Senator Symington. Is that the only agency in the Government,
then, that has documents you are not entitled to receive?
Senator McCarthy. No, I think. Senator Symington, that neither
my committee or any other investigating committee should receive any
documents which will disclose the names of informants. No. 1; and
No. 2, demonstrate investigative techniques; No. 3, will endanger the
national security.
Senator Symington. The CIA is often called our worldwide FBI.
Senator McCarthy. I think it is a slander on the FBI to call the
CIA a worldwide FBI.
Senator Symington. Did you ever hear of Admiral Canaris?
Senator McCarthy. I have heard of Admiral Canaris.
Senator Symington. Do you remember who he is?
Senator McCarthy. I couldn't give you his record.
Senator Symington. For the record, inasmuch as the CIA is an-
other lifeline to our security, I would like to say that Admiral Canaris
was a man who turned against Hitler and that the chief reason that
we succeeded so rapidly in conquering Italy, from what I have gath-
ered— and I will check it for the record and correct myself if I am
wrong — was due to the efforts Mr. Allen Dulles, the present head of
the CIA. It saved the lives of many, many American boys, the mag-
nificent job that the CIA did in establishing contact, with Mr. Dulles
heading the show, as I understand it, with some traitors in Germany.
_ Senator McCarthy. Senator Symington, there was no CIA at that
time.
Senator Symington. It was the same thing as the CIA ; the initials
may be wrong, but what I was getting at more than the Agency
Senator McCarthy. Senator, you are wrong.
Senator Symington. Was the man who was heading the Agency.
2872 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
If Mr. Can- feels there wasn't any special agency of that character —
I know he spoke to you about it— I have just as much pride in the CIA,
Mr. Carr, as you have in the FBI, because it is part of America.
Senator McCartht. I am just telling you that the CIA was not
formed
Senator Symington. It was OSS, Office of Strategic Services.
Senator INIcCartht. O. K. If you want to talk about the OSS,
good, but let's make it clear that the CIA was not formed until long
after the time you mentioned.
Senator Symington. The CIA is the successor to the OSS. I think
w? are now dealing in semantics, and I Avould like to proceed.
The next question : Do you think there can be any information con-
tained in documents, any at all, in the executive branch which the
chairman of this committee should not be entitled to receive if he, the
chairman, thinks it bears on an investigation he is conducting'^
Senator McCarthy. You asked 3 or 4 questions. Senator.
Senator Symington. I will repeat. Will the reporter repeat the
question ?
Senator McCarthy. I have it all in mind.
First, you say that the CIA has been responsible for certain activi-
ties, and we agree that it is not the CIA. You say it is the OSS. You
say the CIA was the successor of the OSS. I believe that anyone in
Washington, including Senator Symington, I believe, will agree that
the OSS was the most heavily infiltrtited by Communists of any
organization that we have ever had in this country. I think there is
no doubt about that. How many of those were blanketed into the
CIA, I don't know, but in view of the fact that you brought up the
question of OSS, I want to make it clear that I am no admirer of the
Communists in OSS.
Bill Donovan, who headed that, I think was an outstanding indi-
vidual. At the time the OSS was formed, we were usin-^ them behind
the lines to work with Kussia. So it was only logical that there would
be a lot of Communists in the OSS.
I think it is extremely unfortunate, however, that we have blanketed
many of those Commuiiists into the CIA. As the Senator knows, the
House committee headed by, I believe it was Mr. OK^onski— I am not
sure— pointed out that Communists from the Army Intelligence were
quietly shifted over to CIA.
I want to say. Senator, that I think the worst situation that we now
have is not in the military. It is in CIA.
Senator Symington. I don't want to interrupt you, but I didn't
ask too many questions on that. If the CIA
Senator McCarthy. When you brought up OSS, I have to comment
on it.
Senator Symington. It is a problem of the Republican administra-
tion, not for me.
Senator McCarthy. It is a problem for both of us.
Senator Symington. It is a problem for the country, too, but it is
under the Republican administration.
All I was trying to say is that Mr. Allen Dulles, who runs the
CIA today — and all I know about it is from a great flyer with a record
in both wars who now works for him — is responsible for one of the
most magnificent intelligence jobs that was done in World War II.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2873
That Tvas told to me at one time by Bill Donovan, who incidentally
was also my personal lawyer. I am sorry, for his sake.
Can we get on with the questions ?
Senator McCarthy. No. I would like to comment.
Senator Stmingtox. I would rather ask the questions, and you can
comment later.
Seantor McCarthy. Senator, when you make a comment
Senator Symington. I know, but I tell you what I think we had
better do. Not because it is a Republican problem, but because it
is an American problem, I brought up what I thought was right.
I will have a statement for the hearing tomorrow with respect to the
CIA and the OSS.
Senator McCarthy. I assumed you would.
Senator Symington. It was my understanding that the OSS was
an organization that handled intelligence abroad outside of the United
States in World War II. If that is wrong, I stand corrected. The
agency now that handles intelligence outside the United States is
the CIA. I knew very well the first head of the CIA. General Van-
denberg was the second head of it. I think I know a little about
him. But I don't think it is on this issue and I would like to proceed
with the questions.
Do you think the FBI — you answered that.
Do you think there could be any information contained in docu-
ments in the executive branch, any at all, which the chairman of this
committee should not be entitled to receive if he, the chairman, thinks
it bears on an investigation he is conducting?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Symington. Do you think that you and members of this
committee are entitled to receive all executive department documents
containing secret information ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Symington. Including the defense and security of the
United States.
Senator ]McCarthy. No.
Senator Symington. Does that also go for all members of the staff?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Symington. To the best of your knowledge have all mem-
bers of this subcommittee staff been cleared by the Defense Depart-
ment to see secret documents ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know.
Senator Symington. I asked to the best of your knowledge, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. I don't know. None of them have been turned
down as far as I know.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, on this question I have a brief
statement made by the President and I would like to ask Senator
McCarthy's comments on it. It was made on May 12.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington, the timekeeper has told us
it is time. I was going to give you an extra minute but if you have
a longer series I suggest you wait until the next go-around.
Senator Symington. I will see how long it is.
Senator Mundt. I suggest, if it is agreeable with you, we will stand
in recess. We will take our afternoon recess for 5 minutes.
(After the recess.)
Senator Mundt. The committee will please come to order.
2874 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. I think it is unnecessary to remind our guests
who were here before the recess of the fact that we have a standing
committee rule against audible manifestations of approval and
disapproval. We will, of course, expect our guests this afternoon
to continue to comply with that regulation. I am sure they know-
by now that the instructions that the committee has given to the Capi-
tol Police force and to the plainclothes men are to escort from the room
anybody who violates that standing committee rule.
Senator McCarthy ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, could I, for the information
of Mr. Welch, Senator Symington is not here, I think I should make
one correction in this list of j^eople who work for the committee that
I gave to Mr. Welch. We have a vast number of people. I shouldn't
say vast number of people ; we have a sizable number of people, who
act as technical advisers at no salary whatsoever.
Take, for example, in this room today there is Mr. Robert Vogeler,
sitting back here. Mr. Vogeler was in a Communist prison for some
IT months. He was kept without sleep for some 82 hours, questioned
some 73 or 74 hours. No fifth amendment allowed there, Mr.
Chairman.
And I have a great number of individuals like Bob Vogeler who
give us extremely valuable advice on the Communist conspiracy. I
have not included them in the list, Mr. Welch, because they are all
unpaid and no definite hours or anything like that, but just good,
loyal Americans, who, like Vogeler, know what communism really
stands for ; right. Bob ?
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes that the list that has been sup-
plied to Senator Symington and the Army are all that Senator
Symington had in mind. Those are the people on the payroll. I
think the list is now complete. We are happy to have Bob Vogeler
here, incidentally, in the audience, because he did demonstrate that
sturdy kind of American patriotism of which we are all proud.
[Applause.] That violation will not be included as a violation. I
hope we have it all out of our system now so there will be no disturb-
ance through the rest of the day.
Senator Jackson. I want to ask you. Senator McCarthy, you recall
that I asked a question whether there were any unpaid people on the
staff. I assume that you are just talking about in this case, such as
Mr. Vogeler and others that are acting in an informal capacity, not
working on the staff as such.
Senator McCarthy. That is right. I want to make the record
clear that we do have a number of individuals like Bob Vogeler who
1 feel can give us good advice, good background of the Communist
movement.
Senator Jackson. I agree on that, but in fairness to you, you recall
the question that I asked earlier, and you said there were no unpaid
staff assistants.
Senator McCarthy. There are no unpaid full-time staff assistants.
Senator Jackson. Are there quite a number of part-time people
who work on investigations? I don't want to go into this, Mr. Chair-
man-
Senator McCarthy. I am glad you raised this, Senator, and I don't
mind it at all. I can't estimate the number. There are a sizable
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2875
number of people who are deeply concerned about this Communist
threat, who give us advice, information, call it technical assistance,
call it what you may.
Senator Jackson. No, I didn't mean that. I mean w^orking on the
staff as such.
Senator McCarthy. No, there is no one — I assume you are referring
to anyone in the type of position that Dave Schine was in. The
answer is "No."
Senator Jackson. Part-time assistants or anything like that?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Senator Jackson. You confer v;ith a lot of these people, and so on ?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, my primary interest in the CIA aspect was because
it is our agency for worldwide intelligence. To be frank, I knew little
of the OSS. I found out the following facts: The OSS was run by
so-called Wild Bill Donovan, who, as I said, is my friend and formerly
was my lawyer. I know we Avill all agree that he is a great American.
Actually, he holds the highest decoration that this country can give
for valor, the Congressional Medal of Honor. At this time, he is in
town. At this moment, I understand, he is convening with the Joint
Chiefs of Staff with respect to the grave problems we now face in
southeast Asia. I have had confirmed my statement with respect to
Mr. Allen Dulles. From early 1948, from Switzerland, he was in
contact with the anti-Nazi German underground, which included
Admiral Canaris, and which produced the attempted revolution
against Hitler on July 20, IDM, which almost resulted in his death.
Also, he was one of the leaders in the successful efforts to get the
Italians to surrender long before the Nazis did.
I wanted to make the record clear on this, Mr. Chairman. I know
little or nothing of the OSS. It was disbanded before I came into the
Government, either, or just afterAvards, way back in 1945. And then,
as I understand it, there were a series of trusteeships which were set
up and carried over until the present agency, the CIA, was established.
I know little or nothing of the OSS but I know quite a bit about the
CIA, primarily because the late Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg was head of
CIA, just prior to the time he came into the Air Force as First Vice
Chief of Staff, and then Chief of Staff.
I thank the chairman for letting me place these remarks in the
record.
Senator Mundt. Yes, indeed. We have concluded that 10-minute
round, so Mr. Cohn, if you have any questions, you are the next man
to ask them. You have 10 minutes.
Mr. CoHN. One or two short questions, sir.
Senator McCarthy, you have talked about CIA, and Communist
infiltration of the CIA. I will ask you this first of all :
Has it always been your position that there are in CIA and other
infiltrated agencies, vast numbers of great loyal Americans who have
done an outstanding job?
Senator McCarthy. I would say that CIA has a very sizable num-
ber, in fact, the vast majority who are good, loyal, outstanding
Americans.
2876 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
For example, Admiral Hillenkoeter who is the head of CIA, I
think \Yas a great American — I should say is a great American. I
agree that Wild Bill Donovan is a great soldier, a great person. I may
say, Mr. Cohn, that I think Senator Symington, and I certainly think
he is very sincere about this, when he says all I know about the CIA
is what I learned from a great flyer, he is inclined to do what so many
people do, to have someone say, "This is a great organization, a won-
derful group of men," from that point onward I think. Senator, you
feel that you have to defend everyone in the organization. I would
say it was no favor to the CIA not to expose those who may be traitors,
even though the number may be a very, very small percentage. Does
that answer your question?
JVIr. CoiiN. Yes, sir ; the one last question, I suppose, would be this :
Senator Symington likewise
Senator McCarthy. Just one minute, Mr. Cohn,
May I say that Owen Lattmiore, for example, was one of the top
men in OSS, as I recall.
Mr. Cohn. The point I was going to make is this. There are, I
assume you Avould agree, there were in OSS when it was in existence
a great number of very able and very loyal and patriotic Americans.
Senator McCarthy. A great number of very loyal Americans.
May I say, Mr. Cohn, that when OSS was organized it was organized
during the war years, and they utilized the services of Communists.
I don't question that. The difficulty Avas that after the war was over,
those Communists who were in OSS during the war were blanketed
into other agencies.
Mr. Cohn. That was going to be my last question on this point.
Even though there were a great number of loyal Americans, the pub-
lic record now shows that OSS was the victim of a highly successful
plot of Communist spy espionage infiltration, and there have been
persons high in rank in OSS who have since those days invoked the
fifth amendment as to whether they were engaged in espionage, be-
fore the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee presided over by two
great Americans, Senator McCarran and then later Senator Jenner.
Is that right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
JNIr. Cohn. Nothing further.
Senator Symington. May I rise to a point of personal privilege?
Senator Mundt. You may.
Senator Symington. So far as the flyer and CIA is concerned, I
was not thinking of the late great general. General Vandenberg. I
was thinking of a colonel with whom I grew up who is now working for
the CIA. I have no doubt that we have Communists in agencies of
the Government. I also have no doubt that the Soviet Kremlin lead-
ers would hope that we have disunion with respect to all Government
agencies under this Republican administration.
So far as the OSS is concerned, somebody handed the initials to me
as a correction with respect to the CIA. It was technically correct.
I know literally nothing about it except I do know that one of the
greatest and one of the most courageous human beings that I have
ever known is Bill Donovan, Congressional Medal of Honor winner,
who ran the OSS during the war.
Senator Mdndt. Have you concluded, Mr. Cohn?
Mr. Cohn. No further questions. Senator Mundt.
SPECIAL INVERTTGATTON 2877
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes ; and before you
take them and before your time starts, I wondered if you would like to
confirm for the benefit of the hard-working members of the press and
photography and radio and television corps, the conversation which
we had during the recess when I suggested that it seemed to me that
probably the committee members were taking more time with ques-
tions and statements this afternoon than you might have anticipated ;
that it might necessitate our runnino; rather long if we were to press
for an adjournment today, and asked j'OU what you thought about it.
I wondered if you would like to express yourself so our friends out
in front could be guided, since you really are the keyman in the time
situation now.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I think you flatter me when you say
I am the keyman. It is true that we have moved more slowly today
than I had supposed. It is true that last night I rather felt we might
conclude today.
It is unhappily true that today, with a single exception, is one day
when I have not felt quite up to par physically, which is, I would like
to think, not quite like me.
It follows that we can't finish tonight, as I view it, even if we ran
late, and my own wish would be that we would either adjourn at the
regular time or slightly ahead of that, and I could then say that, as-
suming the Senators' questions are pretty nearly at an end, surely
around the middle of the day tomorrow I think we would come to a
conclusion.
Senator Mundt. It would be your thought, then, that perhaps we
should finish with the conclusion of the morning session, Mr. Welch ?
Mr. Welch. I think we might. I would suggest that we start at
the regular time and take a recess tomorrow, in the morning, and by
running late at lunchtime it now would be my guess — once again
depending somewhat on what happens at this side of the table
Senator Mundt. I realize you have no control of very much of the
time. It would depend on my colleagues. But I have talked with
them, and they are nearing the end of their questioning, too, so I would
hope that by tomorrow we might pass more frequently and see that
you have more consecutive opportunity to talk.
Mr. Welch. Thank you, sir.
Senator Mundt. Now you may proceed with your 10 minutes, and
start the clock.
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, I want to say something to you, sir,
with some gravity, if I may. I have on more than one occasion heard
you say casually — "Now that the Army charges have proved entirely
false" — and you have said such things, have you not, just yes or no?
Senator McCarthy. I think I have said the Stevens-Adams
charges. This is not an Army charge.
Mr. Welch. May I remind you. Senator, with all humility on my
part, that you are a witness in this case and not a judge. Will you
agree to that?
Senator McCarthy. That I am a witness?
Mr. Welch. And not a judge.
Senator McCarthy. I am a witness.
Mr. Welch. And not a judge ?
Senator McCarthy. You are certainly right.
2878 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
;Mr. AVelch. And that your testimony today and what you may
hereafter give must be weighed on the one hand by the committee;
is that right, sir?
Senator McCarthy. You say the committee must weigh my testi-
mony 'i
Mr. Welch. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. Obviously.
Mr. Welch. And the country must also or will at least make up its
minds.
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I think the jury which is watching on
television will make up its mind, watching all the witnesses.
Mr. Welch. INIay I suggest to you. Senator, that whatever the
outcome, it would be more graceful'at least for you to await the ver-
dict rather than to announce it, so you think, from the witness chair?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, may 1 tell you, sir, that when you
or anyone else makes charges against my staif which charges are
completely unfounded and you and I will agree now that the charges
against Mr. Carr were completely without foundation, that I will not
be graceful when it comes to that sort of situation. I have a duty.
Let's make this clear, Mr. Welch. This is no game. This is no game.
When I hire — when I get these young men to come down here, Mr.
Cohn and Mr. Carr, when I get them to come down here, I warn them
ahead of time that they are going to be smeared by every left-wing
Communist publication in the country. I didn't anticipate that the
smear would extend to the places where it has. I just want to tell you,
Mr. Welch, as long as it is proven now that those charges are com-
pletely fraudulent, completely unfounded, I don't think there would
be anything graceful about my trying to intimate that there is some-
thing truthful about them. Your name was signed to the charges, Mr.
Welch. Your name was signed to the charges.
I am not accusing you of having thought them up. I don't think
you did. I think you were merely the lawyer in the case, brought in,
told the facts, and then drafted the complaint as any lawyer would.
But I repeat again, I repeat again, sir, that now^ that it has been
proved that Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr are guilty of only one crime —
namely, that they fight communism, that they fight treason, that
they work night and day to do that — as far as I am concerned they
have all of my ability, all the power of my mind and body that I have,
to prove how dishonest, how fraudulent "those charges are.
I hope that answers your question, sir.
Mr. Welch. Have I ever suggested to you. Senator, that we are
sitting in this room playing a game ?
Senator McCarthy. I would think from watching you, Mr. Welch,
that you do not grasp the seriousness of this threat. I would think
that if you did, if you did maybe you would have worked with the
committee to try ancl call this off after it appeared there was no merit
to the charges, so we could get back to exposing Communists.
Mr. Welch. Senator IMcCarthy, I work at an address where there
are men without limbs, who lost them fighting communism. And
where men confer mornings, to my knowledge, about the possibility of
a war that may be closer to us than either you or I know.
And those men with whom I confer are going to fight that war and
many of them are going to die if we have it.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2879
Don't think, sir, that under those circumstances I think we are play-
ing a game.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch-
]\Ir. Welch. I am only suggesting to you, sir, that as to this case
■which has to be judged, as I view it, in part by the people and in part
b}^ the committee, it would be graceful for Welch not to announce
that your charges were completely false, and that the Army is surely
the complete winner and that we might all as well go home tonight.
I think, sir, if you would permit me to say it, it would be graceful for
you to await a verdict by those who are placed in a position to render
the verdict.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. May we go on or w^ould you like to say something?
Senator McCarthy. I would like to comment on that, Mr. Welch.
You said that you have contact with men without limbs, who fought
in the last war. May I tell you, Mr. Welch, that just as certain as
you sit here today, the 4 months we have wasted on this hearing called
on by your clients, will result in the end with many more young men
being without limbs.
While we investigate these fraudulent charges, Mr. Welch, there
are Communists working in our defense plants, there are Commu-
nists being left unmolested in our Government. That is the tragedy
of this hearing. The only good thing about it, the only good thing
about it is that I believe the American jury, if I judge the reaction I
have gotten properly, are getting a picture, a picture of the serious-
ness of this situation, a picture which, Mr. Welch, unfortunately I
am afraid some of us in this room do not have.
Mr. Welch. May I only say to that, Senator McCarthy, that as to
every name of any subversive or Communist threatening this country
that is reachable by the Army in any way, if you in the last weeks had
given their names to the Army or if you would give them to the Army
now, they would either be under surveillance or suspended or kicked
out.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, don't pull that on me.
Mr. Welch. Do you not know, Senator
Senator McCarthy. Don't pull that on me, sir.
Mr. Welch. Don't you know
Senator McCarthy. Don't pull that on me.
Mr. Welch. Don't suggest to me, sir, if you please, that the United
States Army is going to cut its own throat by letting Communists
cut its throat, as you say they may. Don't tell me, sir, that the United
States Army doesn't fight Communists.
You do not have a monopoly, sir, in that field. You do good work.
I admire the work you do, when it succeeds. But, believe me, sir,
steadily, day by day in this Government, not only in the Army but in
the Navy and in the Air Force and throughout the Government, as
you know the fight goes on, sir. And you should rejoice with me that
there are people after Communists tonight in addition to you, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I think you and I should be on the
same side in this fight. I think essentially we are. You t^ll me that
if I would give the names of Communists, you say, to the Army —
let's make it clear, Mr. Welch, this is no contest between our com-
mittee and the Army. As far as I know, 99 percent of the uniformed
2880 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
men in the military wholeheartedly back up any effort to get the few
traitors, the few rotten apples, as I have said before, out of the barrel.
We intend to continue to do that. Now, the only way on earth
that our committee can now get back to its job is to end this investiga-
tion, and I think it has served a purpose ; and then, when we do that,
we have a vast amount of work to do, which we intend to do, and may
I say I hope we can do it, I hope we can do it with the cooperation of
your client, Mr. Welch. But with or without that cooperation, take
my word for it, we will do it.
"Mr. Welch. In that connection, Senator, and in a calmer mood, per-
haps, your committee does have one thing that no executive depart-
ment has, and that is the power to subpena; is that not so?
Senator McCarthy, That is correct.
Mv. Welch. And that, you agree, is an important power?
Senator McCarthy. Very important.
Mr. Welch. And once you know the location of a real Communist,
you can expose him swiftly.
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I think that it is easier for a committee
to do it than any loyalty board.
Mr. Welch. "That is right. You have that wonderful power of
subpena and it is good that you have it. On the other side of the
picture. Senator, people like the Army and the Navy and the Air
Force have the power of surveillance, which you can't do with 14 men.
You agree to that, too ; don't you ?
Senator McCarthy. You are a hundred percent correct. We only
have a few investigators, and they have hundreds.
Mr. Welch. And that can be important?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, because I think
Mr. Welch. Because if you have a suspected Communist and you
can put him under surveillance and watch him closely enough, you
may not turn up only 1, that Communist, but 9 others, making 10.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I think putting a man under surveillance,
while it is a very complicated procedure, I believe it takes 6 men on an
average to keep a man under surveillance for 24 hours, I think that is
a very important thing.
Mr. Welch. Right. So that when you say there could be coopera-
tion between your committee and someone like the Army or the Navy or
the Air Force, I agree with you that that is sublimely true, sir, and I
agree with you that each has a weapon, an important weapon, that
the other one does not have.
Senator McCarthy. You are right,
Mr. Welch. How much time ?
Senator Mundt. Your time has expired.
I have conferred with the committee and they feel, as you feel, that
they haven't perhaps more than one 10-minute period each left, and
not all of them have that, and if you feel that would give you ample
time tomorrow, we would be willing to recess now because you say you
are not feeling as well as you could.
Mr. Welch. It could mean that would mean a somewhat later lunch.
And I could even be wrong there. It would be hard to guess. But
I would say we could finish at lunch time.
Senator Mundt. Under those circumstances, we wdll recess until
10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, at 4: 35 p. m., the committee recessed to reconvene at
10 a. m., Thursday, June 17, 1954).
INDEX
Page
Ableman, Ernie 2S(j9
Adams, John G 28G0, 2861, 2S66-2Sfi8, 2870, 2877
Adams, Sherman 2870
Air Force (United States) 2875, 2879, 2880
Anti-Nazi German underground 2875
"Application for Appoiutmeut in the Oflioers Reserve Corps" 2856
Army (United States) 2854, 2856-2858, 2864, 2874, 2877, 2879, 2880
Army Intelligence (G-2) 2872
Army Transport Service 2856, 2857
Asia 2875
Atohiic bomb plants 2.-55
Atomic Energy Commission 2853-2855, 2868
Attorney General of the United States 2'^:58
Caine Mutiny (motion picture) 2>50
Canaris, Admiral 2S71, 2875
Capitol Police 2849, 2874
Carr, Francis P 2855, 2859. 2860, 2868, 2872, 2878
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 2868, 2871-2873, 2875, 2876
Chief of Staff (Air Force) 2875
CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) 2868, 2871-2873, 2875, 2876
Clifford, Clark 2861, 2867, 2S70
Cohn, Koy M 2S50, 2851, 2855, 2867, 2868, 2876, 2878
Columbia Pictures 2850
Committee on Un-American Activities (House) 2852
Communifjt-front organizations- 2850, 2851
Communist infiltration of the CIA 2875
Communist Party 2850,
2851, 2855, 2859, 2861, 2862, 2865, 2866, 2872, 2874-2876, 2878-2880
Communist prison 2874
Communist publication 2878
Communists 2850,
2851, 2855, 2859, 2861, 2862, 2865, 2866, 2872, 2874-2876, 2878-2880
"Confidential" document 2854
Congressional Medal of Honor 2875
Constitution of the United States 2858, 2867
Counselor to the Array 2860, 2861, 2866-2868, 2870, 2877
Defense appropriations 2S51
Defense Department 2853, 2873
Defense Secretary (United States) 2869
Democratic lawyer 2870
Department of the Army 2854, 2856-2858, 2864, 2874, 2877, 2870, 2SS0
Department of Defense 2853, 2873
Department of Justice 2853
Donovan, Bill 2872, 2873. 2875, 2876
Dulles, Allen 2871,2872, 2875
Espionage Act 2851
Eisenhower, President 2853, 2870, 2871
FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) 2854, 2858, 2868, 2871, 2873
FBI documents 2858
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 2854,2858,2868,2871,2873
First Vice Chief of Staff (Air Force) 2875
Germany 2856, 2857, 2871
Hawaii 2856,2857
Hensel, H. Struve 2870
Hilleukoeter, Admiral 2876
n INDEX
Page
Hitler 2871,2875
Hoover, J. Edgar 2857
House committee 2872
House of Representatives 2852, 2854
House Un-American Activities Committee 2852
Hydrogen bomb plants 2853,2855
Internal >Security Subcommittee (Senate) 2876
Italy 2871
Japan 2856,2857
Jenner, Senator 2876
Joint Chiefs of Staff 2875
Justice Department 2853
Korea 2856, 2857
Korean war 2857
Loyalty board 2868
Loyalty oath 2851
McCarran, Senator 2876
McCarthy, Senator Joe, testimony of 2850-2880
McClellan, Senator 2850, 2865, 2870
Members of the House of Representatives 2852,2854
Military Intelligence (G-2) 2872
IMurray, Colonel 2869
National Security Resources Board 2853
Naval Maritime Reserve (United States) 2856
Navy (United States) 2879,2880
Nazis 2875
Nuremberg trials 2859
Office of Strategic Services (OSS) 2872,2873,2875,2876
O'Konslii, Mr 2872
OSS (Otliceof Strategic Services) 2872,2873,2875,2876
Panama 2856,2857
Pentagon 2858,2868
Philippines 2856, 2857
President of the United States 2853, 2870
Psychological warfare 2856
Q-clearance 2853-2855
Republican administration 2872, 2876
Republican cloal^room (Senate) 2862,2863
Republican lawyer 2870
Republican problem 2873
Republican Secretary of the Army 2870
Republicans 2802, 2867, 2870, 2872, 2873
Rogers, Bill 2870, 2871
San Francisco, Calif 2856
Sehine, G. David 2850,2851,2855-2857,2859,2860,2864,2875
Schine's loyalty oath 2850
Second World War 2872, 2873
"Secret" document 2854
Secretary of the Army 2860-2862, 2865-2868, 3870, 2877
Secretary of Defense 2869
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee 2876
Senate of the United States 2854, 2862
Soviet Kremlin 2876
Stevens, Robert T 2800-2862, 2865-2868, 2870, 2877
Stevens-Adams charges 2877
Switzerland 2875
Symington, Senator 2861, 2862, 2866, 2867, 2869
"Top secret" document 2854
Transportation Office (United States) 2856
Un-American Activities Committee (House) 2852
United States Air Force 2875, 2879, 2880
United States Army 2854, 2856-2858, 2804, 2874, 2877, 2879, 2880
United States Army Transport Service 2856, 2857
United States Atomic Energy Commission 2853-2855, 2868
United States Attorney General 2858
United States Congress 2854
INDEX III
Page
United States Constitution 2858, 2867
United States Department of Defense 2853, 2873
United States Department of Justice 2853
United States House of Representatives 2852, 2854
United States National Security Resources Board 2853
United States Naval Maritime Reserve 2856
United States Navy 2879, 2880
United States President 2853, 2870
United States Secretary of Defense 2869
United States Senate 2854,2862
United States Transportation Office 2856
Vandenberg, Gen. Hoyt 2873, 2875, 2876
A'ogeler, Robert 2874
Wasbington, D. C 2850,2864
Wbite House 2853
Wild Bill Donovan 2875,2876
World War H 2872, 2873
Zwicker, General 2861
o
4
I *
J^r-^-*^-^
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES
AND COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRE-
TARY OF THE ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN
G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE HENSEL AND SENATOR
JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and
FRANCIS p. CARR
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SPECIAL SUBCOMMIHEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS OE THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-THIED CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PURSUANT TO
S. Res. 189
PART 70
JUNE 17, 1954
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
46620° WASHINGTON : 1954
Boston Pub'- -^i"y
Superintendent of Documents
NOV 2 4 1954
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KARL E. MUNDT, Soutli Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, AikaBsas
MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HF:NRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idalia JOHN P. KENNEDY, Massacliusetts
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
JOHN MARSHALL Bl'TLER, Maryland THOMAS A. BURKE, Gliio
CHARLES E. POTTER, Micliigan SAM J. ERVIN, Jit., North Carolina
RicHARO J. O'Melia, General Counsel
Walter L. Reinoi.ds, Chief Clerk
Special Subcommittee on Inve.stigations
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
CHARLES B. POTTER, Michigan HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
Ray H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel
Thomas R. Puevvitt, Assistant Counsel
Robert A. Collier, Assiatant Counsel
SOLis HORwiTz, Assistant Counsel
Charles A. Maner, Secretary
n
CONTENTS
Page
Index I
Testimony of —
McCarthy, Senator Joe, United States Senate 2882
EXHIBITS
Introduced Appears
on paye on page
41. (a) Excerpt from Public Law 513, 81st Congress, 2d session-. 2904 2904
III) Excerpt from title IS, United States Code Annotated,
Chapter 37, Espionage— Censorship 2904 2904
III
SPECIAL SENATE INYESTIGATION ON CHARGES AND
COUNTEECHARCtES 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
THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1954
United States Senate,
Special Subcommittee on In\'estigations of the
Committee on Government Operations,
Washington^ D. G.
The subcommittee met at 10:15 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the
caucus room of the Senate Office Building, Senator Karl E. Mundt,
chairman, presiding.
Present: Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota;
Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois; Senator
Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator Henry C. Dwor-
shak. 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 ; Thomas R. Prewitt,
assistant counsel; Charles Maner, assistant counsel; and Ruth Y.
Watt, chief clerk.
Principal participants present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a
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 come to order.
The Chair would like to greet our guests who have come to the com-
mittee room this morning and bid you welcome. We are happy to have
you as guests of the committee watching one of the committees of your
Government in action.
For not exactly the first time but perhaps the final time, the Chair
must convey to the audience the contents of the standing rule of the
committee forbidding any audible manifestations of approval or dis-
approval on the part of the audience of any kind at any time.
The uniformed members of the Capitol Police whom you see before
you and the plainclothes people scattered among you have a standing
order from the committee to remove from the committee room imme-
diately, politely but firmly, any of you who for any reason elect to
violate the terms by which you entered the chamber, namely, to refrain
from audible manifestations of approval or disapproval. Those au-
dible manifestations of course would include applause, raucous laugh-
ter, and other audible exx^ressions.
2881
2882 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
By and large our audiences have been tremendously cooperative,
and I feel confident that that type of cooperation will continue now
as we enter not only the twilight but the evening time of these hear-
ings.
On behalf of Senator John McClellan, I would like to announce
that he will be in the committee room a little later, but a special meet-
ing of a committee of which he is a member dealing with an atomic
energy installation was called for this morning.
Onbehalf of Senator Potter, I would like to announce that he, too,
will be in the chamber later, but he is presiding over some special
hearings dealing with problems involving the television and radio
industries.
We had concluded our last round of questions yesterday afternoon,
Mr. Welch had just terminated a 10-minute go-around, and, Mr. Jen-
kins, have you any questions to ask at this time ?
Mr, Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, A UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN— Resumed
Senator Mundt. The Chair has 1 or 2 questions that he wishes to
propound, but he wants to withhold them until Senator McClellan is
here, because they deal with the problem of the chicken luncheon which
Senator McClellan has expressed much interest in, and I want to try
to satiate his curiosity to a certain extent about that.
Other than making his statement, then, the Chair will pass.
The Chair would like to say if there are any individuals here from
the press or radio or the police force, or any of the others who have
been cooperating and helping with this committee, who did not receive
the invitation Mrs. Mundt and I extended yesterday, I wish you would
call my office. We tried to get every conceivable name. It was a diffi-
cult task and we might have missed a few. You w^io have been in-
volved with us all as sort of coparticipants in this experience are in-
vited, and we would like to have you call the office so we can extend an
invitation if anyone was overlooked.
Senator McClellan not having arrived, of course he passes.
Senator Dirksen, have you any questions?
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, I would like to read into the rec-
ord a court decision in 1944, in the United States Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit. This was the case of the United
States V. AndoJscheh (C. C A., 2d, 142 F. R., 2d series, pp. 503,
506). The presiding judge who handed down the opinion was Judge
Learned Hand and he had this to say about an attem^^t of the Govern-
ment to withhold Government records in a trial which the Govern-
ment brought against certain internal revenue inspectors for con-
spiracy.
I read only one paragraph into the record, Mr. Chairman, so that
it might be preserved, and have the attention of the committee at some
subsequent time. As I say, the case was decided in 1944, and the perti-
nent paragraph reads as follows from the opinion.
While we must accept it as lawful for a department of the Government to
suppress documents, even when they will help determine controversies between
third persons, we cannot agree that this should include their suppression in a
criminal prosecution, founded upon those very dealings to which the documents
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2883
relate, and whose criminality they will, or may, tend to exculpate. So far as
they directly touch the criminal dealings, the prosecution necessarily ends any
confidential character the documents may possess ; it must be conducted in the
open, and will lay bare their subject matter. The Government must choose;
either it must leave the transactions in the obscurity from which a trial will
draw them, or it must expose them fully. Nor does it seem to us possible to
draw any line between documents whose contents bears directly upon the crimi-
nal transactions, and those which may be only indirectly relevant. Not only
would such a distinction be extremely difficult to apply in practice, but the same
reasons which forbid suppression in one case forbid in the other, though not,
perhaps, quite so imperatively. We hold that the regulation should have been
read not to exclude the reports here in question.
I submit that, Mr. Chairman, so that it might become a matter of
record, and I presume at some time or other members of the committ(?e
may want to pursue it further and examine the entire opinion b}' a
very distingiiished jurist, Judge Learned Hand.
I have only one question at the moment, Mr. Chairman.
I think, uniformly, we have asked nearly every witness on the stand
at least something about his military experience, his military record,
and his military background. I think, then, for the purpose of round-
ing out the record, that that is an appropriate question, and I should
like to ask Senator McCarthy whether he would care to say something
on the record with respect to his own military experience.
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to, Senator. I wonder, however,
if you would bear with me. I would rather bring the written docu-
ments up here than to have you rely upon any recitation by me. That
may take a few minutes.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, with that understanding, then,
suppose we defer the matter until the documents are available.
Senator Mundt. We can pass that question until the next go-around„
^ Senator Dirksen. I ask unanimous consent that at the appropriate
time I may propound the question.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson?
Senator Dworshak?
Mr. Cohn ?
Mr. CoHN. No, sir.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes early in the morn-
ing for once.
Mr. Welch. Mr. St. Clair will have the first matter.
Senator Mundt. Mr. St. Clair ?
Mr. St. Clair. Senator, I would like to discuss with you the occasion
of January 22 when John Adams visited in your home that evening.
Do you recall that?
Senator McCarthy. I do, sir.
Mr. St. Clair. Somewhat prior to that time, it is true, is it not,
Senator, that you, as chairman of the subcommittee, had requested that
the Army produce members of its loyalty board ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. St. Clair. I believe, to pinpoint it, that that was about January
Senator McCarthy. That was one of the times. I asked before that,
though.
Mr. St. Clair. I mean, really then it was requested that they be
produced in the hearing room. That was the first time?
Senator McCarthy. I gave them a cutoff date at that time. I had
requested the members long before that.
2884 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. St. Clair. The cutoff date was January 22, which was a Friday ?
Senator McCarthy. I believe that is the correct date.
Mr. St. Clair. Following that, I think it has already appeared in
evidence, and I will ask you if you knew, that John Adams had been
to Senator McClellan following January 18?
Senator McCarthy. No, I didn't know that he had been to see any
of the Senators. I suspected he had done it.
Mr. St. Clair. You knew he had been in to see Senator Dirksen
with Mr. Morgan, didn't you ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. St. Clair. You didn't know that ?
Senator McCarthy. No, I didn't know that.
Mr. St. Clair. You suspected that he had, though ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I thought Adams had been to see some
of the Senators.
Mr. St. Clair. All right. So on January 22, which was Friday, it
is true, is it not. Senator, that you invited— I am sorry.
Senator McCarthy. Pardon me, I am sorry.
Mr. St. Clair. It is true, is it not, that you invited Mr. Adams to
your home on the 22d ? Isn't that right. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Adams has so testified. I was under the
impression that he had called and suggested that he come over, but if
he said that I invited him, I would take his word for that.
Mr. St. Clair. I don't think it is very important, but Mr. Adams
was not in the habit of inviting himself to your home, was he?
Senator McCarthy. If Mr. Adams, as he did, testified that I had
invited him, my memory is not clear enough so that I would correct
Mr. Adams.
Mr. St. Clair. All right.
I believe the conference took a matter of more than an hour, did it
not. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I think it was perhaps 21/2 or 3 hours. 1
couldn't fix the time.
Mr. St. Clair. Quite a long time ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. St. Clair. During the course of it, as I understand Mr. Adams
testimony, Mrs. McCarthy was a very gracious hostess and fur-
nished
Senator McCarthy. She always is. i ^ j.
Mr. St. Clair. I believe when Mr. Adams left, some products ot
that great State of Wisconsin were given him.
Senator McCarthy. Yes. In fact, I think Jeannie gave John some
South Dakota sausage and some cheese from Steve Miller s establish-
ment in Marshfield, Wis., some excellent cheese.
Mr. St. Clair. That is perfectly all right with me. ^
Senator McCarthy. Up in Wisconsin, Steve's cheese is rather well
known.
Mr. St. Clair. Thank you for that, sir.
I think, sir, you testified that one of the subjects discussed by you
and Mr. Adams was naturally the calling of the members of the
loyalty board.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. St. Clair. Would you say, sir, that that was the first subject
that was discussed ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 2885
Senator McCarthy. Not necessarily the first subject.
Mr. St. Clair. Of any importance.
Senator McCarthy. The principal subjects had to do with the call-
ing of the loyalty board, the calling of those responsible for Commu-
nist infiltration.
INIr. St. Clair. Now, Senator, you knew and Mr. Adams knew that
you wanted to ask those members of the loyalty board, among other
things, questions as to why they cleared persons who you claimed were
Communists.
Senator McCarthy. Not necessarily persons that I claimed were
Communists, but persons who had long Communist records, some of
them with records of stealing radar secrets.
Mr. St. Clair. Without going into each such case, at least that is
what you had in mind, and John Adams knew that. There is no
question about it. You wanted to ask these people about their actions
as members of the loyalty board ?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct. In addition to that, I had
made it clear to John that we wanted to go into other matters — the
transcript will show that — matters having to do with alleged graft.
Mr. St. Clair. Graft and things like that ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. St. Clair. Senator, you knew then, as you know now, that for
any member of a loyalty board to testify as to his actions with reference
to clearing these first that you have referred to as Communists, would
require them to give this committee loyalty-security information in
violation of Presidential order. Whether you like it or not, or whether
it is right or not, that W' ould happen.
Senator McCarthy. You are right, but may I say this, Mr. St.
Clair
Mr. St. Clair. Certainly.
Senator McCarthy. As Mr. Welch has pointed out and as a number
of Senators have, this is a very important issue in this case. The
question is: Can any President — the old Truman order originated
this — can any President, in violation of the law of the Congress, keep
from the American people — by "the American people" we refer to the
Congress here, because we are their hired men down here — can any
President keep information of wrongdoing from the American people
by an Executive order? I think not.
May I say now that I think this is something we should test out. We
should test this at the very earliest opportunity by way of contempt
proceedings.
I\Ir. St. Clair. Perhaps that is so. But on the night of January 22
you knew and Mr. Adams knew that the state of affairs as of that night
would preclude any member of the executive department testifying as
to loyalty security information. Whether or not we agree that the
Truman order was right or wrong, that was the situation.
Senator McCarthy. No, Mr. St. Clair, I think that under the Tru-
man order they were precluded from giving us much of the informa-
tion we needed.
Mr. St. Clair. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. But I feel that they could have given us some
information, No. 1", and No. 2 ; I explained to Mr. Adams that I took
40620°— 54— pt. 70 2
2886 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
the position that no one except the President is immune from a
subpena, that once you have been subpenaed, you are before the com-
mittee, that then you can certainly refuse to violate any law. It is
possible you may be able to refuse to violate a Presidential directive
which is contrary to the law, although I question that very much.
Mr. St. Clair. You wouldn't want an employee of, let's say the
Department of the Army, to take it upon himself to violate an order
of the President of the United States. You may not agree with the
order. Maybe I don't. That for the moment is not material. But
Senator McCarthy. Mr. St. Clair, you and I could argue about
this
Mr. St. Clair, I don't care to, sir.
Senator McCarthy (continuing). For days. We are trying to
finish up this hearing.
Mr. St. Clair. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. May I say this, that we did by Presidential di-
rective establish the legal theory during the trials of the war criminals
that no man could use the order of a superior as an excuse for his
actions.
Mr. St. Clair. I understand.
Senator McCarthy. He had to abide by the laws of the land re-
gardless of any orders of any superior.
I think that any individual who knows that Communists were
wrongfully cleared and sent back to secret work is bound to give that
to the committee even though he might lose his job because of it.
Mr. St. Clair. Let's pass on from there. Senator. I am certain
tliere is no one in this room or anyone listening who does not under-
stand your position in the matter.
Senator McCarthy. I hope that is true.
Mr. St. Clair. This is the type of conversation that you and John
Adams had in your apartment that night, is it not?
Senator McCarthy. We discussed many things.
Mr, St, Clair. As to the loyalty security board.
Senator McCarthy, As totheloyalty security board, it wasn't con-
fined to that, Mr, Adams
Mr, St, Clair, We know there were other subjects, but let's see if
we can break it down.
Senator McCarthy. Let me give you roughly the general picture.
Mr, St, Clair. I would prefer, sir, if you don't mind — Counsel will
of course be allowed to ask you questions. If I don't ask you the right
questions, that is my fault.
Senator McCarthy. O, K.
Mr. St, Clair, Thank you.
Now, Senator, Mr. Adams told you it was his opinion that as a
matter of law these persons could not come, isn't that right?
Senator McCarthy. As I recall, he did that several times.
Mr. St. Clair, He presented what you now believe is a fallacious
legal defense of his position.
Senator McCarthy, He presented a very good argument, yes.
Mr. St. Clair. That is right. And he is a lawyer and you were a
lawyer.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, that is true.
Mr. St, Clair. So that— are the 10 minutes up ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2887
Senator Mundt. No. It was an error. I tapped the microphone.
Mr. St. Clair. Also the question of Mr. Cohn was discussed that
night?
Senator McCarthy. Eight.
Mr. St. Clair. Mr. Adams reLayed information to you about what
he thought Mr. Cohn had done, and so forth ; is that correct ?
Senator McCarthy. No, that is not correct.
Mr. St. Clair. Well, he told you something about what he thought
Mr. Cohn had been doing, did he not ?
Senator McCarthy. No, that is not stating it correctly. Just so
there is no misunderstanding, Mr. St. Clair, Mr, Adams made it clear
to me that unless the hearings were called off, especially the loyalty
board hearings, that there would be charges made against IMr. Cohn.
As I recall, we never even discussed the validity of them, because I
didn't think — I know I didn't think they were valid, I don't think
John thought they were valid.
Senator Mukdt. Your time has expired, Mr. St. Clair. Have you
completed your answer, Senator INIcCarthy? If so, we turn to Mr.
Jenkins.
Mr. Jenkins. I pass.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will pass until Senator McClellan re-
turns, and Senator McClellan will pass until he gets here.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, if the material is here, I would
like to again propound the question I asked a while ago.
Senator McCarthy. First, I am not sure if I completed my answer
to Mr. St. Clair. Let me make it clear, Mr. St. Clair, that Mr. Adams
did discuss Mr. Cohn and he discussed Mr. Schine, he discussed that
entire situation. Let me repeat that I don't think Mr. Adams felt
that the charges that he was making against Mr. Cohn, and he did
make some, I don't think he ever felt they were valid. He knew that
I knew they were not valid. And I believe we had a complete under-
standing on that. I don't think there is any question about it, regard-
less of what was said at that time.
Mr. St. Clair. All I want from you, sir, is that these matters were
discussed.
Senator McCarthy. We discussed Cohn and Schine. There is no
question about that.
I am sorry, Senator Dirksen.
Senator Dirksen. Are you prepared now to respond to the question
I asked a while ago ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. Your question was
Senator Dirksen. As to the military record.
Senator McCarthy (continuing). To give the military record.
First let me say that my military record, I think, is no better and no
worse than the average of the some 10 million men who served in
the service. However, I do think that — I may say. Senator, I appre-
ciate your asking this question in view of the new^s stories about my
military record, and I think it is well to cover that under oath, not
that I think that record is important at all.
I was a judge in 1942, As a circuit judge, I was exempt from serv-
ice. I decided to go into the Marine Corps. I went to Mihvaukee,
Wis., tried to enlist, I was told at that time that they would take it
under advisement, that I was over 30, that perhaps I couldn't qualify
to enlist as a private.
2888 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Dirksen. Would you indicate the dates as you go along, or
the approximate dates?
Senator McCarthy. It was in May or June. I don't recall the
exact dates. I was later advised that with the background of quali-
fications, that they needed what they called ASY, I believe that is the
title, meaning aviation specialist, which, again, is rather meaningless.
It meant that they needed some old men in each squadron to sort of act
as advisers and counselors to the young pilots. They had
Senator Dirksen. And what year was this?
Senator McCarthy. This was in 1942, in June, I think it was June
1942. They informed me that they needed at least one ground officer,
known as combat intelligence, to work with the squadron, to handle
intelligence matters, handle the problems of the young men in the
squadron. I proceeded to apply. I entered the service, I think it
was July 13, 1942. I left the service in — it was either February or
March of 1945. Within that time, I served as a ground officer Avith
a Marine dive-bombing squadron, did some flying in the back seat,
qualified as a rear seat gunner, did some photographic work, work
from the rear seat of a dive bomber.
Finally, I was shifted to the intelligence staff of what they called
COMAIRSOLS, which means the Commander Aircraft Solomons.
The Commander of the Aircraft in Solomons shifted every 3 months.
For 3 months they would have an Army man, for 3 months a Navy
man, for 3 months a Marine Corps officer. They had charge of all
of the aircraft, Army, Navy, Marine Corps, New Zealanders, and on
down the line.
Senator Dirksen. Did you fly in any other theater of operations
besides the Solomons area or Guadalcanal ?
Senator McCarthy. I spent my entire tour of duty, three tours of
duty, in the general area of the Solomon Islands, it was a very hot
area; we ended up when it was a rather cool area. We got beyond
the Solomons. We flew the first strafes on Eabaul, New Ireland.
There was a great concentration of Japanese aircraft, and antiaircraft
defenses, around Rabaul, New Ireland, and the job of the dive bomb-
ers, torpedo bombers, together with MacArthur's men coming from
the west, from New Guinea, was to try and knock out those installa-
tions so that our Navy could move into the Western Pacific.
Senator Dirksen. Would you state for the record the rank that you
had?
Senator McCarthy. The first rank I had as an officer was a first
lieutenant. They finally got short of captains and I was made a
captain. I am now a lieutenant colonel.
Senator Dirksen. Do you still maintain a Reserve status?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator Dirksen. And if this is not an immodest question, would
you care to say anything about any awards or decorations that may
have been made to you as a result of your service ?
Senator McCarthy. Ordinarily, Senator, I would prefer not to,
but in view of the fact that I
Senator Dirksen. The question was raised, I think, before.
Senator McCarthy. I read in the Daily Worker in New York,
and other of the Daily Workers, about the record and awards. I
don't mind reading them just to set the record straight. The first
award which I got, and one that I perhaps value most highly, was from
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2889
Admiral Nimitz. He was the commander of the aircraft in the
Pacific. I could read it if you like. It is a citation for meritorious
and efficient performance of dut;^ as an observer and rear gunner of
a dive bomber attached to a Marine scout bombing squadron operat-
ing in the Solomon Islands area. [Reading :]
From December 1 to December 31, 1943, he participated in a large number of
combat missions and in addition to his regular duties acted as aerial photog-
rapher. He obtained excellent photographs of enemy gun positions, despite
intense antiaircraft fire, thereby gaining valuable information which contributed
materially to the success of subsequent strikes in the area. Although suffering
from a severe leg injury he refused to be hospitalized and continued to carry
out his duties as intelligence officer in a highly efficient manner. His courageous
devotion to duty was in keeping with the highest traditions of the naval service.
I received a letter, I guess you would call it a commendation, for
efficiency from General Harmon, who was an Army general. I
would just as soon not read them. I will pass them up to the mem-
bers if they care to have them.
I received a letter — I don't know if you would call it a commenda-
tion or j)raise, or something — from Field Harris, who was commander
of aircraft.
Incidentally, Harmon was commander of the aircraft in the
Solomons when I Avas working in that area. And Harris was the
Marine Corps general.
I received the Air Medal with five — I believe it was five — five
Oak Leak Clusters. I received the Distinguished Flying Cross.
May I say, Mr. Dirksen, in connection with that, that in reciting
the receipt of the Air Medal and the Distinguished Flying Cross,
it does not have the meaning that it used to have. You see, in the
Marine Corps and the Navy during the war we took the position, and
I think rightly so, that any man who merely did his duty, who flew
in combat areas, who flew combat flights, that he was not entitled to
any decoration. That is pretty much the position the British military
has taken, too, and I think that is the right position. However, after
the war was over, the Marine Corps and the Navy decided to adopt the
Army's system of giving awards. I dcn't agree with it. The Army
has some good reasons for it. They feel it is a morale builder. Their
system was to give an Air Medal for each 5 flights, each 5 combat
flights, to give a Distinguished Flying Cross for each 25 combat
flights.
At that time all of us who were entitled to Air Medals, Distin-
guished Flying Crosses, were requested to submit a record from our
log books, and we received those decorations.
So may I say that while I naturally am proud of the Air Medal,
the Distinguished Flying Cross, I believe that a man flying in a back
seat of a dive bomber, not responsible for the flight of the plane,
merely taking pictures and shooting the rear seat guns, is not entitled
to compare his Distinguished Flying Cross with the Distinguished
Flying Cross, for example, of a man like Joe Foss, who shot down some
27 planes. He is from the great State of South Dakota, and was in
here the other day. He is one of the most outstanding men we had.
So I merely explain this so it will be clear. Senator Dirksen, that I am
not bragging about any of these decorations. The one I am really
proud of is tne Nimitz citation.
Senator Dikksen. That is all.
2890 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson?
Senator Jackson. I pass.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak?
Senator Dworshak. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. I pass.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn ? Mr. Welch or Mr. St. Clair?
Mr. St. Clair. When the Senator is ready.
Senator, let us go back for a moment. When Mr. Adams and you
were discussing the problem of calling the members of the loyalty
board, did you understand that Mr. Adams had some legal backing
for his position over in the Pentagon ?
Senator McCarthy. I knew that Mr. Stevens backed him up.
Mr. St. Clair. I mean some legal backing, sir.
Senator McCarthy. By "legal backing," do you mean
Mr. St. Clair. Did he have some agreement with some other lawyers
over in the Pentagon, or do you think he was there on a frolic of his
own?
Senator McCarthy. I thought he was there representing Mr.
Stevens. As I recall, we had no discussion of any other lawyers who
liad discussed it with him.
Mr. St. Clair. It now has been in evidence that Mr. Adams had
already been to the Department of Justice and discussed this matter.
Did you know that then ?
Senator McCarthy. I did not know that then, and I think John
should have told me.
Mr. St. Clair. Pardon?
Senator McCarthy. I say I did not know it then. I think in fairness
he should have told me.
Mr. St. Clair. It now appears that he had the backing of the
executive department for his point of view.
Senator McCarthy. Yes ; about the highest backing he could get,
ap])arently.
Mr. St. Clair. That is right. I think Mr. Cohn has explained to
us unless this problem is resolved we are likely to have a collision
again sometime.
Now let's pass on. We have already elicited the fact that in addi-
tion to discussing members of the loyalty board, you and Mr. Adams
also discussed Mr. Cohn and Mr. Schine, and you said you didn't think
John Adams believed what he was telling you, and you naturally
didn't believe what he was telling you; is that right?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. St. Clair. So insofar as it is your testimony, you were both
discussing something that neither of you believed. Would you like
me to repeat it, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. I wish you would.
Mr. St. Clair. Would you read it?
(Whereupon, the question was read by the reporter as above
recorded.)
Senator McCarthy. John was letting me know that they would
issue charges against Mr. Cohn, charges which he claimed would em-
barrass the connnittee, if we didn't call off the hearings. I doubted
if he would go that far. I thought he might.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2891
Mr. St. Clair, You have used some words more than once, Sen-
ator, that are rather fascinating to me. You have said John Adams
made it clear that he would release this report. Is that a way of say-
ing, sir, that he did it by inference rather than by direct language on
his part ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. St. Clair, I don't think John ever said in
so many words, "If you don't call off the hearings I will issue a false
report on Roy Cohn."
Mr. St. Clair. Thank you for that.
Senator McCarthy. During the course of our 3-hour conversation —
it was not aji unfriendly conversation — there was no doubt in my
mind, no doubt in his mind — and John is a very clever young man —
no doubt in his mind that he was threatening to embarrass the com-
mittee by a report claiming that Mr. Cohn was looking for special
favors for Mr. Schine.
Mr. St. Clair, Senator, so that I and perhaps some others of us
can be a little clearer about it, did that become clear to you simply
because Mr. Adams discussed the problem at the same meeting he
discussed the loyalty board ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. St. Clair. Did he use any words that you can recall ?
Senator McCarthy. He talked about how embarrassing it would
be if the claim that Cohn had asked for special favors for Schine
were made public. He talked about how it might wreck the commit-
tee, how it would make it difficult for us to work. It was just a
general discussion along that line.
As I say, he never said, "I am going to issue a report or a smear
report or charges against Cohn," but there was no doubt in his mind,
I am sure, and there was certainly no doubt in my mind, that unless
I would agree to call off the hearings, that would happen.
I may say, Mr. St. Clair, if this might enlighten you somewhat on
the subject, I think I mentioned the term "blackmail." I think I
mentioned the term "blackmail" that evening to John, oh, at least half
a dozen times.
Mr, St. Clair. And you were serious when you mentioned the term
"blackmail"; were you not?
Senator McCarthy. I was very serious.
Mr. St. Clair. It is a very serious matter to have someone attempt
to blackmail a Senator of the United States ; is it not ?
Senator McCarthy. It is. But may I say, Mr. St. Clair, that there
is nothing unusual about a department wanting us to investigate some
other department rather than theirs,
Mr, St. Clair. I understand, but this is a little different.
Senator McCarthy. This was going much too far.
Mr. St. Clair. This w-as blackmail, as you put it, and you have
so charged in these hearings ; isn't that right ?
Senator McCarthy. I have referred to it as blackmail. I think
that is the best term I can use.
Let me make it clear. When you normally talk about blackmail
you refer to blackmail for money. I believe that may be the legal
definition. I am not sure. This had nothing to do with any finances.
This merely had to do with the publication of charges which would
embarrass the committee.
2892 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr, St. Clair. As a matter of fact, it now develops at least that the
blackmail was entirely unnecessary, because Mr. Adams had a legal
defense that was backed up by the highest authority in the execu-
tive department, namely, the Attorney General ?
Senator McCarthy. The contrary is true. It has been proven that
the blackmail was most effective. It has been proven that these hear-
ings were only called off, only called off when those false charges were
made. They effectively called off the hearings, and now for some 31/2
months, I believe, we have been spending the money of the commit-
tee, the time of the Senators, our efforts, investigating charges which I
am sure we all agree now are false, instead of doing the job which our
committee was set up to do.
So it was a very effective blackmail.
Let me say this : It was an effective action. The blackmail was not
effective, because I didn't succumb to it.
Mr. St. Clair. We will come to that in a moment. It was entirely
unnecessary because this man had legal authority backing him up just
saying simply "We can't produce them because we think the law is that
they will be of no use to you."
Senator McCarthy. You are wrong, Mr. St. Clair.
Mr. St. Clair. All right. You say I am wrong but I just want to
ask you if it wasn't unnecessary.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish. I don't think my answers are
unusually long. You say it was unnecessary. The point is that the
hearings were not called off. I know of no other vehicle by which they
could have called them off' except by the charges they issued.
Mr. St. Clair. Perhaps I liave made my point clear. Here is a
man who is allegedly blackmailing you out of something that he had
legal authority to do without any blackmail.
Senator McCarthy. No, I don't think he had any legal authority.
IMr. St. Clair. He had the Attorney General's backing. What bet-
ter could you have. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Oh, a committee is not bound by the Attorney
General.
Mr. St. Clair. No, but he is, is he not?
Senator McCarthy. The Attorney General could not give him im-
munity from a subpena.
JMt.St. Clair. All right. Furthermore
Senator McCarthy. In fact, I don't think the Attorney General
tried to.
Mr. St. Clair. All right. Furthermore, the blackmail was not nec-
essary because the information, sir, tliat he threatened to disclose had
already been disclosed the ])revious month in a column written by a
newspaperman that you don't like, isn't that right ?
Senator McCarthy. I tliink Mr, Adams has testified that he did
advise with and give information to five individuals who have been con-
sistently against our investigations.
Mr. St, Clair. That was after January?
Senator McCarthy. How much of that appeared in their columns
I don't know, because I don't read their columns.
Mr. St. Clair. You remember, sir, that on December 22 you or your
counsel had here a photostat of an article on which you based the pur-
pose of your letter of December 22; isn't that right?
Senator McCarthy. I recall that column.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2893
Mr. St. Clair. You have also testified, sir, that you discussed this
newspaper story with Mr. Adams on other occasions.
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall if I so testified.
Mr. St. Clair. So he was threatening to give out information, sir,
that had already been given out to the newspapers in December ; isn't
that right?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know how much of it he gave out to
these 5 advisers, 5 of the individuals who I say have been consistently
against any exposure of Communists.
Mr. St. Clair. But, sir, those five advisers were giving their infor-
mation after December, not before, not during December?
Senator McCarthy. I have no idea. He has never told me. All
I know about that is what I heard on the stand here the other day.
Mr. St. Clair. You have had
Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. St. Clair, I was very much sur-
prised and very shocked to find that the legal adviser to the Secretary
of the Army was opening his files, discussing these false charges, these
fraudulent charges, with only the elements of the press who are con-
sistently against us.
Mr. St. Clair. But, sir, if you will agree with me, that occurred
after December 1953.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. St. Clair, I don't know when he gave out
the information.
Mr. St. Clair. You have had access, sir, to the testimony of at least
one of those newspapermen taken in executive session, have you not?
Senator McCarthy. I have not seen it. Mr. Alsop was in executive
session.
Mr. St. Clair. Will you consult with Mr. Cohn and verify the fact,
sir, that whatever information was given to Mr. Alsop was given after
December 1953 ?
(Senator McCarthy and Mr. Cohn conferred.)
Senator McCarthy. I may say that Mr. Alsop — let me finish my
question, Mr. St. Clair.
Mr. St Clair. I am asking the question. It is quite a pleasure, I
might add.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish the answer. Let me say that Mr.
Alsop so testified. I personally don't know whether that testimony is
true or not.
Mr. St. Clair. Well, he testified to that under oath, isn't that right ?
Senator McCarthy. Whether he was under oath or not, I would
put no credence whatsoever in what Alsop says. Just so that is clear.
Mr. St. Clair. All right. Mr. Adams also testified, sir, that what-
ever he did, he did after December 1953. So you have that testimony
also.
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't recall all of Mr. Adams' testimony.
Mr. St. Clair. You can take my word for it.
Senator McCartjiy. If you have it there
Mr. St. Clair. I will get it for you in a few minutes.
Senator Mundt. Time has expired.
Senator McCarthy. May I say after yesterday, I don't take any-
one's word for any signature on anything, until I see it.
Mr. St. Clair. All right.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins ?
4CC20°— 54— pt. 70 3
2894 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Jenkins. I pass, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Now that Senator McClellan has returned, the
Chair wants to direct a comment or two to the subject of the chicken
luncheon, which has had so much publicity during the course of the
hearings.
He regrets that his distinguished friend and able colleague from
Arkansas, on the Democratic membership of our comniittee, was not
invited. I am not sure whether it was a shortage of chicken or some-
thing else, I rather suspect it was
Senator McClellan. Something else?
Senator Mundt. Yes; I rather suspect it was because the four Re-
publican members of the committee wanted to have a meeting with
our Kepublican Secretary of the Army concerning a difficulty which
had arisen between him and the chairman. So we had the luncheon.
In going through my pockets last night, changing to my other suit,
I discovered that I still had the original copy of the memorandum in
my pocket, as men have a habit of putting things in there. I am
going to take it out now and read it and then I am going to let Sena-
tor McClellan see it so that he will have had everything that the
chicken luncheon provided, except the chicken. I will give him a
chicken dinner southern style to compensate for that.
Senator McClellan. Parliamentary inquiry. Will you also sup-
ply me the reactions of Secretary Stevens for the record ?
Senator Mundt. Actually, that is the main purpose of what I am
about to pursue. I shall do that at some length. However, let me
read the memorandum first. It is in my own typing. It happened
that I was one of those that helped arrange tlie luncheon. I was the
one there apparently who could type on the typewriter by the touch
system so I served as the stenographer. I have the original notes
here and I am going to show the fourth part to Senator McClellan,
which was never publicized, because at the suggestion of Secretary
Stevens, the fourth point was never made public. So I will show that
to him, and I am sure he will continue to keep it in confidence, and
I have every confidence that he will. It is headed, "Memo of Under-
standing."
At a luncheon conference today attended by Secretary of the Army Stevens
and Senators McCarthy, Dirksen, Mundt, and Potter the following memo of
understanding was agreed to :
1. There is complete accord between the Department of the Army and the
Senate Committee on Investigations that communism and Communists must
be rooted out of the armed services wherever and whenever found.
I am sure that had Senator McClellan been there, he would have
voted "aye" on item No. 1.
2. There is complete agreement among us that the Secretary of the Army
will order the Inspector General to complete the investigation which he ordered
upon my return —
I wrote it, because he dictated this language, Secretary Stevens
did, so it says "my return," and was subsequently changed to be "his
return."
my return from the Far East on February 3, in the Peress case, as rapidly
as possible, and that he will give the committee tbe names of everyone nivolved
in the promotion and the honorable discharge of Peress, and that such indi-
viduals will be available to appear before the committee.
Had Senator McClellan been there, I know he would have desisted
from the chicken long enough to vote "aye" for that, because that is
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2895
in keeping with his conviction that the public is entitled to public
business and j)ublic information.
3. In view of the fact that Senator Symington has requested that the calling
of Zwicker should be postponed until his return from Europe, the appen ranee
of Zwicker will be deferred. If the committee then decides to call Zwicker,
Secretary Stevens stated that at that time Zwicker will be available.
I am sure my distinguished colleague would have voted in support
of his Democratic colleague to carry out the request that we Republi-
cans meeting alone with our chicken voted to do. Incidentally, sub-
sequently General Zwicker was never called. The fourth point is
written out in my liandwriting and I give that now to Senator Mc-
Clellan so he has all of the facts. I have no great feeling about it.
If he wants to disclose it, he may. It was nothing of any importance.
It was written in and then at the suggestion of Secretary Stevens it
was left out of the public release. I mention that simply to point out
that, in a good-natured vein, Senator McClellan has stated several
times that if Secretary Stevens had continued to advise only with the
Democrats as he did for awhile, he would have gotten along much
better than had he fallen in with that gang of Republicans with whom
he had chicken dinner. I think really that was a pretty good memo-
randum of understanding. I know that Secretary Stevens thought
it was a pretty good memorandum of understanding for awhile, be-
cause we posed together, we had pictures taken, many of the members
of the press, who are now here, were there then ; they saw him smile,
they saw the handshakes.
After he left, something happened. I don't know whether he got
back in touch with the Democratic colleagues again or Avhat happened.
At least, I have no criticism of the fact that subsequently Secretary
Stevens did feel that he hadn't gotten as much from the agreement
as he had hoped. I think perhaps somebody has reported a statement
which, for the first time I heard denied under oath and I was mighty
happy to hear it denied under oath by Senator McCarthy yesterday',
when he testified under oath that he did not say and had never said
that after the chicken dinner he made a statement to the general
effect tliat Secretary Stevens had capitulated and had come crawling
on his belly to the committee. Had Senator McCarthy said that, I
think he would have made a very unjust and a very unkind and a
very unfair, and a very uncouth, and a very untrue statement because
certainly no such thing took place. And as the man who did the
typing, I can assure you that all five of us participating in the
luncheon contributed to the memorandum of understanding and that
Secretary Stevens contributed his fair share.
Now, in that connection, I note, and I note with no particular
passion the fact that our Republican Secretary of the Army didn't
come to the Republican members of the committee to seek the counsel
of a Republican lawyer on how best to get along with a Republican
Congress. Instead he went to one of the Democratic members, who
suggested an eminent lawyer in this community by the name of Clark
Clifford, which it was his perfect right to do. They are fellow Dem-
ocrats, they are fellow Missourians, they are friends. I have no
quarrel with the way, the entreating way, in which politics is played,
because politics is an interesting business. Being what it is, I can
well understand that Mr. Clifford would undoubtedly advise a Repub-
lican Secretary of the Army on how to get along with a Republican
2896 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Congress somewhat differently than a Republican lawyer would have
advised a Republican Secretary of the Army on how to get along
with a Republican Congress.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I rise to a point of personal
privilege. I think you are being extremely unjust to a man who had
a fine service record in implying that he would advise the Secretary
of the Army as a Democrat on partisan politics instead of as an
American when he came to him with the story of General Zwicker,
which w^as all that he advised him about. I think you have done him
a great injury, and I am deeply regretful to have you inject this
extremely partisan address to the people of the country as to your
concept on how these hearings should close, sir.
Senator Mundt. Very Avell. You have your point of personal
privilege. Certainly if I said something unkind of Clark Clifford,
whom I do not know at all, it was not intentional.
Senator Symington. In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, you are
also impugning my motives. I am your colleague in the Senate. I
resent what you have said, and I think it is a sad way for us to close
these hearings.
Senator Mundt. I had no intention of impugning your motives. I
said something, which I now repeat, which I think is compatible with
human nature, and that is that I really believe that any Democratic
lawyer, let me put it that way, would be inclined to advise a Repub-
lican Secretary of the Army on how to get along with a Republican
Congress somewhat in a different vein than a Republican lawyer
would have advised the same client under the same conditions.
I was not imputing to you, sir, nor to your friend and associate and
fellow Democrat and fellow Missourian, Mr. Clifford, any improper
motive of any kind. I was simply recording the facts. I presume
that that advice must have come from Mr. Clifford to Mr. Stevens
following the chicken luncheon rather than before it.
Senator Symington. If I may interrupt, because I know he wants
the truth out, the Senator is totally incorrect. I stated yesterday
that the last time in any way, of any character, that Mr. Clifford ever
got in touch with the Secretary of the Army, and he did not get in
touch, the Secretary of the Army got in touch with him was on Sunday,
February 21, which was several days before the famous chicken
luncheon, w4th the shocking reaction of the Army to which I only read
in the papers in Europe. But I want to just say this, again, that, at the
time that Mr. Clifford discussed this matter with the Secretary of
the Army, it was at the Secretary of the Army's suggestion on Sunday,
February 21.
And I must say through all this conversation runs surprise that,
along with many other witnesses which the Democratic members of
this committee wanted to call, in order to give the truth to the people
about this situation, the Chairman himself voted against calling all
those witnesses, including Mr. Clifford.
Senator McCarthy. I wonder, Mr, Chairman, if we could
Senator Mundt. The Chair wants to conclude, if he may, this little
colloquy in his 10-minute period, and wants to say again that he is
imputing to no one improper motives. If, in fact, the two con-
ferences which we now know took place between Mr. Clifford and
Secretary Stevens did take place before the 22d of February, then
the Chair is intrigued. He is also neither perturbed nor provoked by
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2897
the fact that having discussed this general situation with Secretary
Stevens on the plane by ourselves, all the way up to Valley Forge on
the day of the 22d, he learned nothing at that time about the fact
that
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt? I know I
have my date wrong. Sunday is the 22d, I understand from Mr.
Kennedy.
Senator Mundt. I think not. It could be; yes.
Senator Symington. I thought it was the 21st. But I know it was
on Sunday.
Senator Mundt. Very well.
As I say, it would not disturb me. It would intrigue me a little bit,
however, if the conference took place before we had this long talk
going to Valley Forge, that nothing was said to me about it, because I
am a Republican, and I am a friend of Bob Stevens. And I am
further intrigued by the fact that at this long chicken luncheon when
we relayed information to each other about every conceivable phase
of this, none of us at that time learned anything about the fact that
our Republican Secretary of the Army had been getting some guid-
ance from Mr. Clark Clifford.
In other words, I think we could have perhaps been helpful to him
had we known something of him at that time.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Could I say a word at this time ?
Senator Mundt. Yes. I ask that it not be taken out of my time.
In justice to you, you may.
Mr. Welch. It seems to me very unfortunate that this affair should
be coming into this case at this time with Secretary Stevens, as I
know, either gone or about to go to Quantico, Va., on very important
business for the Army. On my knowledge of this whole affair, which
is either confined to the newspapers, which I did not read so acutely
then as I might today, or my conversations with Mr. Stevens, it seems
to me that things are being said here very swiftly and perhaps a little
loosely as to what went on.
I tliink in fairness to Mr. Stevens, the committee ought now to agree
that he may submit in writing a statement on this point if he so
desires. It strikes me that he might feel very deeply that he would
wish to submit such a statement, and in fairness I ask, Mr. Chairman,
that you allow him leave to do so at his early convenience.
Senator Mundt. The Chair certainly, speaking for himself, will be
very glad to have him submit some such statement, because I am sure
thai he will submit a true recital of the facts as they are.
Senator Symington. Would the Chair entertain a motion to that
effect?
Senator Mundt. I don't think we need a motion. I think we can
do that on general consent at the request of Mr. Welch.
Senator Symington. May I say, our distinguished minority counsel,
Mr. Robert Kennedy, from Massachusetts, has for the first time made
a slight error since the hearing started. February 21 is Sunday, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Mundt. I thought it was, because we went to Valley Forge
on the 22d, and the Secretary had called me the evening before ; and
2898 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
that is now part of the monitored transcript, and it is from the mon-
itored transcript, of course, that I have picked up the only informa-
tion that I have about Mr. Clifford.
Just one other statement as to why the Chair voted with his Kepubli-
can colleagues not to call Mr. Schine or General Lawton or Mr. Clif-
ford. The Chair stated at that time that if any of them were to
request that they be heard, the Chair was willing to change his vote.
That was at least a week ago. Mr. Clifford's name has been before
us for at least 2 weeks. The Chair recognizes the perfect propriety of
Mr. Clifford's protecting the client-lawyer relationship which exists
between lawyers and clients. The Chair recognizes the perfect pro-
priety of Senator McCarthy's suggesting that if Mr. Clifford were
called, he would want to call a series of witnesses to confirm or to
refute or to question that.
The Chair recognizes the perfect propriety of Mr. Welch in saying
if General Lawton or Mr. Schine were called, both of whom were
expectecl to testify more in favor of the McCarthy side of this con-
troversy than on the other side, that Mr. Welch properly reserved
the right to call a series of other witnesses to confirm or to refute what
General Lawton or Mr. Schine would say.
The fact remains, therefore, that to reach an agreement to terminate
these hearings, it was necessary someplace to specify the final list of
witnesses. The Chair will now state publicly that he has had no word
or communication of any kind from Mr. Schine or General Lawton
or Mr. Clark Clifford suggesting or requesting that they be called.
None of them has been in any way, shape, or form in contact with the
Chair up to this concluding day of the hearing.
What the Chair has said is not at all in derogation of any of these
three individuals. It is simply to put the record straight and to point
out to my good friend from Arkansas that perhaps the Secretary of
the Army had not fallen into such a bad gang after all when he had
lunch there, because the memo of understanding I think indicates a
course of action which might have provided harmony instead of the
kind of disharmony we have had now for so many unhappy months.
The Chair recognizes Senator McClellan for 10 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. May I make a request of the Chair first? It
now appears from Senator Symington's statement, unless I misunder-
stood him, that there was a call between Mr. Clark Clifford and Secre-
tary Stevens on February 21. If so, we can assume it was monitored.
I wonder if we could have that call at the opening of this afternoon's
session.
Senator Symington. I so move, Mr. Chairman.
Senator McCarthy. I am very disappointed that all the monitored
calls were not produced. I don't know why they are being held out
and only brought out when we discover them by accident.
Mr. Welch, can you produce that at 1 : 30 ?
]SIr. Welch. I have long ago inquired about that. If there was
such a telephone conversation, it a])parently was not from Mr. Stevens'
office, because there is no monitored record of it.
Senator McCarthy. O. K.
Senator Mundt. Very well. It could have been an evening call or
it could have been a personal conference. If there is no monitored
call, of course it cannot be produced.
Senator McClellan?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2899
Mr. Welch. We are in an area, Mr. Chairman, about which, as a
lawyer and not a politician, I am not very well informed. I can only
say to you that I know there is no monitored call of this conversation.
I do not mean to intimate that there was such. I know very little in
this area. But we have now arranged that Mr. Stevens may submit
a statement in writing covering this point which has been under
discussion, if he so desires. If he exercises that right, he will tell
you what happened.
Senator Mundt. Very well. Tlie Chair, of course, will be very
happy to incorporate it in the record.
Senator Dirksen recalls to the Chair's mind the fact that our
motion not to call Mr. Clifford and not to call Mr. Schine and not to
call General Lawton was concurred in both by Mr. Welch, speaking
for his side of the controversy, and by Mr. Colin and Senator Mc-
Carthy speaking for their side.
The Chair recognizes Senator McClellan.
Senator Symington. I would like to say one more thing about that
call, Mr. Chairman, if I may.
Senator Mundt. You may.
Senator Symington. After the name of Mr. Clifford was injected
into these hearings, I asked him what, if anything, had been his rela-
tionship with Mr. Stevens after I left the country. He said that
he saw Mr. Stevens once, and that was on Friday, February 19 ; that
to the best of his recollection Mr. Stevens had called him on Sunday,
February 21. He was not sure of that, but that was the best of his
recollection. One and two. All of this I have testified to in detail
before this committee.
Mr. Chairman, before Senator McClellan speaks, if I may, I under-
stand that Mr. Colin has seen some testimony of Mr. Alsop which I
have not yet seen. I respectfully request that all executive testimony
of any character whatever that has been taken in these hearings be
published and made a part of the record.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman
Senator Mundt. May the Chair say in response to the parliamentary
inquiry, if you have not seen it, it is because you have not gone down
to the office to look for it. It has been there in typing for over a
week, and your minority counsel, Mr. Bob Kennedy, has seen it.
Senator Symington. It is a most extraordinary business when the
counsel and the principals in the case are allowed to see testimony
long before the members of the committee, and I don't see why the
American people aren't allowed to see it. They are just as interested
in this now as we are.
Senator Mundt. If you will turn right over your shoulder and ask
your counsel, Mr. Kennedy, he will tell you he has seen it, and all
the members of the committee have the right to see it.
Senator Symington. Have I the approval of the chairman to
publish it?
Senator Mundt. You have not, because the Chair is bound by the
rule of the committee which precludes publishing it.
Senator McClellan.
Senator ISIcCarthy. May I ask Senator Symington to correct the
record? I am sure he didn't mean to make a mistake. He said "I
have testified three times." I wonder, Senator, if you wouldn't cor-
2900 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
rect that to show that you have never testified, that you have refused
to testify, that you have never taken the oath.
Senator Symington. I will be glad to correct that. I meant to
say that I told you and the members of this committee in detail all that
I knew with respect to this particular subject, and I also again remind
you that there is a very simple way for me to testify under oath before
this committee.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan, you have 10 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like
Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order ?
Senator McCarthy. I think you might call it that.
Mr. Chairman, Just want to make it clear that when Senator
Symington says he has told me, I want to make it very clear he didn't
tell us anything about the relationship of Clark Clifford when Clark
Clifford was advising Secretary Stevens until w^e finally discovered
that in the monitored telephone calls. During all the executive ses-
sions when the Senator from Missouri was urging that I had made
up my mind in this case, I think if he wanted to be completely sincere
at that time he should have told us that he had not only made up his
mind but that he had gotten the lawyer, had urged Mr. Stevens not to
testify, and was in effect one of the moving forces here.
At this late date I know it is a great waste of time to suggest to
the Senator from Missouri that in view of the fact that his monitored
calls prove so clearly that he was trying to call on this ruckus and
also a waste of time to ask him to step down and not act as a judge. I
don't care what he decides. I think I could write his report the
way he would write it right now. But I don't like these protestations
of great piety, that he wants the people to get all the facts, when the
Senator from Missouri had locked within his mind facts which would
be of value to us.
For example, I would lilve very much to know as one of the men
who has been accused in this case, what part the principal adviser of
the Democratic Party has taken in calling on these hearings. I think
the American people w^ould like to know that. I think they would
like to know it under oath. Senator.
Senator Symington. Why don't the Republican members who con-
trol this committee subpena him under oath?
Senator McCarthy. Because, as you know. Senator, Mr. Clifford
having a lawyer-client relationship with you and Mr. Stevens, can
refuse to testify.
Senator Symington. He said he would be glad to become available
to this committee.
Senator McCarthy. You were the man. Senator, who could give
us tlie information. I am not going to press the point any further.
I think you should.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan, you have 10 minutes.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I want to make the record for
Mr. Clifford. Mr. Clifford notified me and I so notified the committee
that he would be very glad to testify before the committee if the com-
mittee wanted him to. I so notified the committee prior to the com-
mittee's voting 4 to 3 not to have him testify.
Senator Mundt, Senator INIcClellan, you have 10 minutes.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2901
Senator jMcClrf.i.an. Mr. Cluiirman, there may be tliose who get ^
great deal of comfort out of such harangues as have been injected into
these proceedings this morning, but I doubt if the tine, loyal, patriotic
American citizensliiji jxirticularly appreciate it. I think some of the
])roceedings in these hearings have disgusted the public with the con-
duct of some of us who have partici])ated in it. I say that regretfully.
Because I think the American people believe and have a right to expect
the United States Senate and its committees to conduct the proceed-
ings of this Government with dignity, with solemnity, and in a spirit
of service to country rather than as a show and as an attempt to.
ridicule and to smear. li ;
I seriously regret many things that have happened in the course of
these hearings.
Now, Mr. (Chairman, I could answer you quite facetiously. I could
very well say that instead of having a famous memo of understanding
that it has turned out to be an infamous memo of misunderstanding.
I do not know what transpired. I am not particularly concerned.
Although a member of the committee was not invited to participate.
Therefore, it was purely a partisan action and the party responsible,
and the members of that party who conducted the proceedings in that
fashion, simply have to take the responsibility.
But, INIr. Chairman, I can say to you this morning that you have
testified eloquently, eloquently, more so than I can express, to the
ineptness, to the lack of capacity of this administration and the
Republican Party to conduct the affairs of Government without tur-
moil and harangue.
I don't know what happened. I don't know whether anyone was
deceived or not. But I do know that before supper, this luncheon
soured on the stomach of the Secretary of the Army. You can take
from now until doomsday to explain it if you want to. I may say to
you in all candor, and I say it sincerely, I believe the American people
will agree with me that if you Republicans would consult with the
Democrats a little more, and take us into your confidence, and welcome
our help, you will have a better administration and a better Govern-
ment.
Bear in mind that everything that is under investigation here now
occurred when the Democratic members were not on this committee.
We were off of this committee in protest of a development and a situa-
tion that obviously led to this tragic situation. I can do no more
except to offer to assist. I didn't send for Mr. Adams or Mr. Stevens.
Tliey came to me. They didn't come to me with the advice and the
counsel of a Mr. Clark Clifford. They came to me with the advice
and counsel and upon the instructions, as I understand it, of Mr. Bill
Rogers, who is next to the highest legal authority in this Government
today and under this administration. What are we to do as Demo-
crats? "We are not invited to participate until a row develops between
the Republicans. Then you seek our advice. I gave the best advice
I know. I immediately told Mr. Adams to go to the Republican
members of this committee and, with respect to the story that he
related to me, I told him I would not touch it unless he gave it to me
in writing.
I can do no more than that, Mr. Chairman, to help you. I have
tried throughout the course of these hearings to try to keep them on
46620°— 54— pt. 70 4
2902 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
track, try to keep out the irrelevant testimony, try to keep out the
extraneous matters, and do a dignified job, and bring these hearings
to a conclusion by getting all of the testimony that was pertinent and
relevant so that we might have the benefit of it when we undertake
to perform our solemn duty of writing a report.
Mr. Chairman, I say to you now that if these hearings are con-
cluded today, and I know you are going to conclude them, without
the testimony of the three witnesses whom I urged this committee
to summon, subpena, Mr. Clifford, Mr. Schine, and General Lawton,
then this record will not be complete, and these hearings will not be
thorough, and very important testimony, essential for a full and
proper consideration of the issues involved, will be forever closed to us.
I hope, Mr. Chairman, that we can end these hearings in a spirit
of real Americanism, not on a partisan issue, but partisan issues have
been injected, I think wrongfully so, but they are here. May I say
to you that so far as I am concerned, I am a Democrat, but I place
the security and welfare of my country above any party.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
I assume that is not a question.
Senator Mundt. I don't think that is a question, so the Chair will
rule that Senator Dirksen has the next 10 minutes.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Dirksen, I would like to comment on that,
in view of the fact that Senator MtClellan was directing, I know,
some of his remarks toward — certainly if not toward me, toward my
party. He says he doesn't like to have this made a partisan issue,
after he spends 10 minutes giving the Republican Party the devil.
I am not too much impressed. Senator McClellan, by your very pious
claim that you feel that all the evidence should be out here. I agree
with you on that. I think the American people should know, when
you talk about the conduct of Senators, I think they should be re-
minded again that 5 days before you came on the committee you were
visited by a representative of Mr. Stevens.
Senator McClellan. By a Republican.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish. I didn't interrupt you, Sen-
ator. You were visited by him. We know that the monitored calls
show that the Republican Secretary of the Army, Bob Stevens, was
repeatedly telling Mr. Symington that there is nothing to this, "I
want to go down there; I want to testify." We know that Mr. Sy-
mington and you. Senator McClellan, were advising him not to do
that.
Senator McClellan. Wait a minute. You have no testimony I
advised him not to do it.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, I didn't interrupt you. Let me
finish it.
Senator McClellan. Let me answer.
Senator McCarthy. You will have all the time, I assume, you want.
It seems we are making these windup speeches here, and I want to
correct what you said. You, for example, in one of your monitored
calls, referred to your Republican colleagues as "that gang." You
refer to the "infamous" agreement made. The only agreement made
was that the American people — the only agreement made was that the
American people and the Congress be entitled to get information about
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2903
Communists. I don't think there is anythino; infamous about that. I
think it is the sort of agreement that should be made. And the Sen-
ator from Missouri, or rather from Arkansas, has said that they were
only called back after there was a row. Senator, you are slightly
in error on that. The monitored calls, about which neither you nor
Senator McClellan will testify, the monitored calls — you nor Senator
Symington — the monitored calls show that the quarrel was the result
of the urging by Senator Symington, and what urging there, was on
the part of Clark Clifford, we don't know.
Senator McClellan, if you are as sincere as you try to make yourself
out to be— and I assume most likely you are — then I think you should
take Symington to the woodshed, talk to him, and say, "Now, Stu, let's
you and I go on the stand. Let's go under oath. Let's show that
when we are telling the television audience that we want all the facts
laid on the table, say that we are going to do that ourselves." Other-
wise, if this hearing ends with the picture being made very clear that
a very innocent Secretary of the Arm.y was goaded and shoved into
this fight by the legal counsel, the top adviser of the Democrat Party,
J may say, John, that your party is going to suffer and bleed very,
very much because of it.
The American people are not going to be fooled. ^Ye have a pretty
intelligent jury. I think some of us here make the mistake of assum-
ing that because a farmer may live on the back 40 acres, the mistake
of assuming that he does not know just as well what is going on here
as any Senator at this table.
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman
Senator McClellan. JNIr. Chairman — —
Senator Dirksen. Could I have a minute of my own time?
Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dirksen. How much time have I?
Senator Mundt. The timekeeper said she took time out for that
interruption.
Senator Dirksen. I will take only a minute, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I have no moral pronouncements or utterances to
make, no preachments, and I intend to do my campaigning after the
Congress has adjourned and we get out on the hustings. I would
much prefer to do it there than to inject it into these proceedings.
But I do believe that all the colloquy calls for at least one observation.
From the time of the Marx manifesto until :^Larch 1933 is 85 years,
but in the period since 1933 more progress has been made by Commu-
nist infiltration than in all the 85 years since the period Karl J\Larx
uttered that manifesto in 1848. The problem that is here today has
been provoked and precipitated, as a matter of fact, by the infiltration
of subversives and disloyal persons and Communists in Government.
We have been steadily and vigorously attempting to uproot them and
get them out of Government. It Avill be said, to the everlasting credit
of the Eisenhower administration, that that work is going forward
on every front.
Had that infiltration not been permitted, had there been vigilance
heretofore, the Republican administration certainly would not have
had the bitter jiroblem with which it has to deal today. God willing,
we will deal Avith it as vigorously as we know how in the interest of
the perpetuity of a free country — period.
That is all 1 have got to say.
2904 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Mundt. Thank you for those purely nonpartisan remarks.
Senator Jackson, you liave 10 minutes.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, I merely want to make this brief
comment.
Senator McCarthy. Senator Jackson, before you start, could 1
make an insertion in the record ? 1 would like to insert in the record,
if I may, an excerpt from Public Law 513, 81st Congress, chapter
185, 2d session, section 3 of which provides:
Nothing in this Act shall prohilut the furnishing, upon lawful dPnmnd, of
information to any regularly constituted committee of the Senate or House of
Representatives of the United States of America, or joint committee thereof.
Approved May 13, 1950.
And one other insertion, if I may. I insert this because of the
questions that have been asked about our right to get information.
This is title 18, United States Code, Annotated, chapter 37, Espi-
onage—Censorship ; section 798, Disclosure of classified information :
Nothing in this section shaU prohibit the furnishing, upon lawful demand,
of any information to any ivgularly constituted committee of the Senate or
House of Representatives of the United States of America or joint committee
thereof.
Added October 31, 1950.
Senator Mundt. Is there any objection to the insertion of the statu-
tory provisions? There being none, they may be inserted and given
the proper exhibit numbers.
(The material read into the record above was marked as "Exhibit
Ko.41 (a) and (b).")
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. Mr. Chainnan, I think it is to be regretted that
at the last day of this hearing we are getting into partisan matters
tliat have no place in these hearings. We on this side have not brought
tliem up. If you want to take a look at the record in these hearings,
it is rather revealing. It is not the Democrats who have been making
the attack on the Eisenhower administration. I will give you chapter
and verse. I will give you the record.
On page 4742, one of the principals here, not a Democrat, has
charged that the CIA administered by the present Republican admin-
istration is infiltrated with Communists. There are 135 Communists
in defense plants. You can find that on page 4814.
On page 4815 of these hearings, there is further reference to the
fact that it would do no good to turn over the 135 Communists to
Charles Wilson, the Republican who administers the Defense Depart-
ment, former head of General Motors.
And on page 4743 of the hearings, it is charged that our atomic-
bomb plants are infiltrated with Communists.
We can go on down, with hydrogen-bomb plants and attacks on
the Attorney General. These attacks have not been made by Demo-
crats.
Senator McCarthy. Will you mention whose testimony you are
referring to ?
Senator Jackson. I am referring to your testimony.
Senator McCarthy. I assumed it was, but I thought the record
should be made clear.
Senator Jackson. I just want to make it clear that I have not made
any attacks on the Republican administration.
SPECIAL ENVESTIGATION" 2905
Senator Mundt. May the Chair inquire whether that was a ques-
tion or not ?
Senator McCarthy. I consider it a question.
Senator Jackson. No. I just made a statement.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter, you have 10 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. A point of personal privilege, if that is not
a question.
Senator Jackson. I merely quoted the record.
Senator McCarthy. If Mr. Jackson can quote from what I said
and apply a special meaning to it, I have a right to comment on it.
Senator Mundt. You may be heard on a point of personal privi-
lege.
Senator McClellan. I have a point of personal privilege which
precedes his, if we are going to do that.
I want to ask one question.
Senator McCarthy. I have a point of personal privilege before I
will answer your question.
Senator ]\Iundt. Have you a point of personal privilege ?
Senator McClellan. My point of ])ersonal privilege precedes his.
I yielded here to try to go around like everybody else. There isn't but
one thing that I want to clear up.
Senator Mundt. If you have a point of personal privilege, you may
state it.
Senator McClellan. I want the Senator to correct one statement
he made.
Senator McCarthy. I will answer no question until I raise my
point of personal privilege.
Senator McClellan. I will ask it. I don't care whether you an-
swer it or not.
Senator Mundt. The Chair may say
Senator McCarthy. I will answer it after I raise the point of per-
sonal privilege.
Senator McClellan. I will ask it so you can be thinking about it.
Senator McCarthy. O. K. Good.
Senator ISIundt. Go ahead.
Senator McClellan. That is, you said that I advised Secretary
Stevens not to testify. I think you want to correct the record. I
advised him to announce to the papers that he would testify. If you
will read your memorandum.
Senator Mundt. The Chair now recognizes Senator McCarthy on
a point of personal privilege.
Senator McCarthy. I am going to reverse myself, I have that
right, and answer the question first.
Senator IMcClellan, reading 'your monitored calls, you express great
surprise — let me say this, let me quote it verbatim :
I never was so surprised when you got off over there in that gang without
anyljocly with you.
All that Stevens did when he was with that gang was agree to give
us information. I can't see any other interpretation you place upon
that.
Senator McClellan. Read the one about testifying. I advised him
to testify.
Senator McCarthy. If you did, that should be in the record, Sen-
atoi\
2906 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McClellan. It is in the record.
Senator McCarthy. If you did, that should be in the record?
Which call?
Senator McClellan. I don't know. You have them all before you.
Senator McCarthy. I have one of them here. Just a minute.
While you are making the point, I will have my staff — Will you
check and see if there was some place where McClellan advised him?
Get that for me. It should be in the record.
Mr. Jackson, you in effect made the statement that I had been
accusing the Eisenhower administration of being infiltrated. You
and I know that we inherited this situation, and that every Communist
we have dug out so far, with one exception, was brought in long
before President Eisenhower took over. You know. Senator Jack-
son, that if it were not for the Democrats on this committee we would
not today be in this investigation. We would be investigating Com-
munists.
I think it should be clear beyond words, and I am sure it is to the
public, that there is no one as unhappy as my Democrat friends up
here when there appears some possibility of ending the investigation.
And, Senator Jackson, may I say that these monitored calls, and I
have often said I don't like this type of eavesdropping but here they
have served a valuable purpose, they have shown that Senator Sym-
ington was called by Stevens only once, that after that Senator Sym-
ington called Stevens every time, talked about the advice of "my
legal friend," meaning Clark Clifford.
When Symington, 2 days before the charges were issued — or, rather,
Stevens 2 days before the charges were issued, said, "There is really
nothing to this."
We find that Stu Symington was saying, "Don't put me in a box.
I can call this thing off. We can block this."
By "block this" Senator Symington could have meant only one
thing, namely, block the exposure of those Communists whom we in-
herited from your administration, Senator Symington. _
And now I hope you realize that also was also nonpartisan.
Senator Jackson. Senator, why is it that you distrust Mr. Wilson,
the Secretary of Defense, so, and Mr. Stevens, that you will not turn
over these names of the Communists in the defense plants?
Senator McCarthy. I do not distrust Mr. Wilson. The names have
been offered. They have been offered under the conditions that this
committee gets them. I called a meeting of this committee the other
night to get permission to turn the names over under the conditions
which the Secretary of Defense said he would want if they were to be
turned over. I had that meeting over in Mark Trice's office. Not a
single Democrat showed up. I had a meeting with the press after-
ward. At that time I think I was too generous. I said I felt that you
were just busy, tied up. Since that I have learned that Senator
Symington took the position that I could not call a meeting of my
investigating committee because it was nonexistent while this com-
mittee was in effect.
In any event, the Democrats did not show up. You were notified.
The meeting was for the purpose of getting your permission to turn
the names over to Mr. Wilson, without the application of the rules
which our committee applies, namely, that no name will be made
public unless and until the man appears in executive session. I repeat,
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 2907
Senator Jackson, when the Democrats were not there we decided we
should not do business without them.
Senator Mundt. In order to correct the record, the Chair would like
to say as far as Senator McClellan was concerned, at the meeting in
Mark J'rice's office, as the Chair was leaving, he met Senator McClel-
lan on the floor of the Senate, at which time he said he was heading for
Mark Trice's office. So Senator McClellan had every intention of
going to the meeting.
Senator Jackson. Complete the statement. Where did you meet
me?
Senator McCarthy. You never got there.
Senator Mundt. I am coming to you. I left the Senate floor, and
down in the subway, just as we left it, I met Senator Jackson who had
been over at the other office where the meeting was originally sched-
uled, 357, and he said, "Where is the meeting?" And I said, "It has
been abandoned because none of the Democrats came early enough."
Some had gone to the other place.
Senator Jackson said he was on his way over to the meeting, and I
said there is no need to do it. Is that correct ?
Senator Jackson. That is correct.
Senator Symington. In order to wrap up the package of the proper
denial of this falsehood, I went to the meeting, and there was nobody
there, and they said everybody had left. I then went back and called
Senator Jackson and he said he would come over. And by the time he
got over, we went back and there was nobody there at all. I went to
the meeting twice for your personal information.
Senator McCarthy. Let's get the record completely straight. Tlie
four Republicans waited in Mark Trice's office until after the Senate
had adjourned. The clerk of the Senate told me that he informed
everyone of the Senators that the meeting would be in Mark Trice's
office for the convenience of the Senators. I want to ask Senator
Symington a question, when I get through here, if I may have your
attention.
Then I came over to 357, where some of the staff was present, and I
asked whether or not any of the Senators had shown up there. I was
informed they had not.
Now, I would like to ask you. Senator Symington, did you or did
you not make the statement that you would not come to the meeting
because you felt that I had no authority to call the meeting?
Senator Symington. I said that I would do exactly what Senator
McClellan thought was right. He was on the floor and we were dis-
cussing whether we would or would not go, as I remember it. He
then left the floor, and I called Senator Jackson. At no time do I
remember making a distinct statement that I would not go. If my
colleagues, I am the junior member of this committee, had gone, be-
lieve me, I would have been there. There was discussion among us
that you were trying to run an end run of diversion. I would say end
run of diversion No. 1,620. By trying to get us — let me answer the
question, please.
Senator Mundt. I was simply trying to get order.
Senator Symington. The idea was that you wanted to discuss
whether or not you proceeded with any plans, whether you would be
allowed to proceed by this committee with any plans, in order to go
ahead with Defense Department investigation. One of the principles
2908 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
established when this committee started was that we weren't going to
have investigations until the hearings were over. And, therefore, it
was decided, as I remember, that you should not have any further in-
vestigations. Not until now did 1 have the faintest idea that you in-
tended to turn over any 133 names to the committee. And I will
answer you this way : I thought it was wrong to go to the meeting. I
went to the meeting and everybody had gone, but I did discuss whether
to go or not.
Senator McCarthy. Where did you go ? ^ «, ,
Senator Symington. I went right to the outside of the office and was
told that nobody was there. I then went back and called up Senator
Jackson. I think I have discussed this long enough. I will say this :
You didn't tell me, nor did anybody else tell me, in this diversion num-
ber whatever it was, 1,620, or something, you didn't tell me at that
time that you had the slightest intention of giving up any names. You
said you wanted a hearing in order to start investigations on the side,
to create diversion from these he<arings. And I would like to say this,
as long as you have asked the question, you have brought it up, and the
record will prove, so many diversions, in spite of the fact that now
you and your Republican colleagues are calling these hearings off
without hearing witnesses who could help us get the truth. You put in
so many diversions that a long time ago these hearings would have
stopped if you, yourself, had not deliberately tried to throw the block
on so many questions that came up, and put us into channels which
had nothing to do with the original charges. I think you realize that
better than anybody else.
Senator McCarthy. Do I understand, then. Senator, that the rea-
son you did not come to the meeting was because you thought I was
going to ask for permission to hold hearings to expose Communists in
defense plants ? • , i
Senator Symington. No. I told you that I discussed with my col-
leagues going to the meeting, and I would have been glad to go to the
meeting. There was discussion among us whether you, as I remember
it — you brought the matter up now, and it comes back to me as I talk —
there was considerable discussion among the Democrats whether there
were two committees, and inasmuch as you had graciouslv offered to
leave this committee as chairman while these hearings to discuss what
you did to the Army were being conducted, we wondered whether you
had the right to have a meeting of the committee, because you had
resigned as chairman.
I believe Senator McClellan will verify that that was discussed with
the Eepublican leaders.
Mr. Cohn, can I have the witness' attention ?
I think that was discussed.
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes— may the Chair say, I think
we have this meeting pretty well ventilated now. The Chair has told
you what was told to him by both Senator Jackson and Senator
McClellan.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes there was an honest misunder-
standing. No. 1, about the place of the meeting. ^ I didn't know there
was any misunderstanding about the purpose of it. At all events, the
meeting was called, and we did discuss the possibility of changing the
rules as far as turning over the 130 names was concerned, but there
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2909
was no Democratic representation there, and I am prepared to believe
it was because of an honest misunderstanding about the place.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Could I remind the committee that Mr. St. Clair and
I came this morning hoping \\e might ask an occasional question.
Senator Mundt. We are going to get to you very shortly.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I have not finished my statement.
Senator Mundt. I am sorry.
Mr. Welch. We still entertain that hope, but I would like to say
to you for myself that I am almost numb at what I have heard, it is so
far removed from what we are trying to try here. I beg of you, sir,
can we not finish the questions that we would like to ask, and then if
somebody wants to practice politics for 2 weeks in this room, it is all
riglit with me.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I have a point.
Senator Mundt. I think you have made your point of personal
privilege.
Senator McCarthy. No. Senator Symington just got through mak-
ing a statement containing very serious charges, and I think there is a
point of personal privilege. I think Mr. Symington has demonstrated
perfect — I think he has performed a great service in the last 10
miimtes. He has demonstrated to the great American jury how unfit
he is to sit as a judge on this committee. He has told us now that he
did discuss whether or not they should come to a meeting because he
was afraid of an end run. The end run, as he now testifies, was that
I was going to start to expose Communists in defense plants.
I had made that public statement. I said I wanted to do that in the
evenings, on Saturdays, and we find now that he thought that was so
serious that he discussed that with his Democrat friends. What their
decision was, I don't know, but I know they didn't come to the meet-
ing. We stayed in the meeting
Senator Symington. They discussed it with me. Senator. It is a
very proper thing to discuss whether you can have two committees and
one chairman. Don't you think it is ?
Senator McCarthy. Will you give me the courtesy I gave you?
Senator Symington. I will be glad to. Senator. I will be glad to
give you every courtesy I think you deserve.
Senator McCarthy. As I started to say before I was interrupted,
my Republican friends and I stayed in Mark Trice's office until a
considerable period of time after the Senate had recessed. The clerk
told you — you have admitted now you knew the meeting was being
held. You have now in effect told us the reason you didn't come wa^
because you were afraid I was going to ask for permission to hold
hearings to expose Communists.
Senator Symington. I told you I did come, Senator. I told you
I did come.
Senator McCarthy. Please don't interrupt. I checked with 357,
thinking my Democrat friends might have come there. I find they
did not.
Senator Symington, the thing that bothers me now is how much dis-
ruption, how much you will try to throw the blocks into any exposure
2910 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
of Communists in the future. Mr. Clifford, you, your side of the
aisle, have been very successful. You have said over and over, just
as a final remark, Senator — you have said over and over that you
don't want the hearings ended until we get at the truth. I don't
believe that our American jury is too much impressed when they see
Senator Symington sitting there refusing to take the oath as I have
done, as rny Republican colleagues have done, as Mr. Carr and Mr.
Cohn have done — take the oath and tell us — it is a very simple thing,
and it shouldn't take you any more than half an hour — tell us what
happened, how come you got the Democrat adviser to undercut the
Republican Secretary of the Army, just what steps you took.
It couldn't take you long to do that, and for your own good. Senator,
if I may advise you, although you have not asked for the advice, you
just better take this stand before we close these hearings.
Senator Symington. Senator, I have a letter here.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington.
Senator Symington. If you will sign this letter — and I will read
it to you again just to be sure. I think it is just to be sure. I think
it is just too long to read, but any time that you would like to sign
this letter, we will go over and see the vice president to set this
committee up and you and I can then — you testify before a commit-
tee with respect to the charges against you, and I will testify before
a committee with respect to the allegations against me.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I have made this statement several times and
I move that we go on with the hearings. Otherwise we will continue
to be here on this subject.
Senator McCarthy. You have made an offer and I intend to accept
it. You have asked that I sign a letter which contains false state-
ments. I will not sign that but, Senator Symington, I will sign any
kind of a document agreeing to go before any committee that this Sen-
ate decides to set up, and answer any questions about my background
from the time I was born up until the 16th day of June 1954.
I will do that. I will do that not because I think a Senator is
required to, but I will do it in order to get you on the stand and try
and get the truth you talk about. Senator. So if you want to do that,
you can take the stand. I will step down right now. I will not sign
the letter with false statements in it.
Senator Symington. It is very simple. It is in the record. All
you have to do is sign it, and then we will be all set.
Senator McCarthy. Don't pull that phony thing on me.
Senator Symington. Sign the letter. There it is. Senator. It has
my signature on it.
Senator McCarthy. You have a document with false statements
in it. I will not sign and agree that is true. You are not fooling
anyone.
Senator Symington. I move we go on with the hearings.
Senator McCarthy. You are not fooling anyone. Senator Syming-
ton. I have offered to go before any committee, do anything you ask, if
I can just get you to come down here and take the oath so we can
get the answers to some questions. You are not fooling anyone at all.
I am sure of that.
Senator Symington. Senator, let me tell you something.
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes that
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2911
Senator Symington. The American people have had a look at you
for 6 weeks. You are not fooling anyone, either.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter.
Senator Potter. Mr. Chairman, do I have my time, my own time?
First I would like to associate myself with a statement made by
Mr. Welch. We have spent the last hour and a half in personality
clashes and partisan politics. We have spent 36 days in these hearings,
and if we as Senators can't conduct a hearing on the vital charges
that have been made and do it with dignity and do it without partisan
and personality clashes, all of us should be defeated.
We have a lot of business to attend to. The President has gone on
the air to ask the people to support him and his legislative program.
I am a member of nine committees, and I think they include every
controversial committee in the Senate. I am the chairman of a com-
mittee which is now holding hearings, and the hearings are being
held at the present time without my being there.
If we are going to fulfill our promise to the American people of
putting through the program — and it is a good program — that the
President has enunciated, I say we must and should stop these per-
sonality clashes that take place in this hearing room ; we should rise
above partisanship and endeavor to seek out the facts and let the
chips fall where they may.
This is the 36th day of this hearing. As the days go on, the work of
the Senate becomes more and more acute. We have talked about other
witnesses being called. I would venture to guess, by a check of the
transcript, that at least half or possibly two-thirds of the time has
been taken up on matters that have nothing to do with the present
controversy. This morning has been a good example.
I sincerely hope that we can at least continue for today, remove
our partisan conflicts, remove our personality clashes from this hear-
inir, and allow Mr. Welch and Mr. St. Clair to continue and to conclude
their examination.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I was in Europe at the time
of the so-called chicken lunch, and I have here some papers that I
had not seen before that were brought to me. The headline is :
Steaming Mad. Stevens seeks a showdown with Ike on whether he is to be
sacrificed for the sake of future politics.
And then the article in the paper reads :
Army Secretary Robert Stevens sought a showdown with President Eisen-
hower today on whether he is to be sacrificed to Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
"for the sake of future politics." A high administration source revealed that
Mr. Stevens feels the White House has failed to give him adequate Iiacking
in his feud with the Wi-sconsin Republican. "The Secretary does not want
to resign," the source said, but he is determined to find out how far the adminis-
tration will go to support his stand against Senator McCarthy's "unwarranted
abuse" of Army officers.
I can read on in this. I might say that it comes from a newspaper
which I think we will agree has no Communist leanings, one of the
Scrip])s-Howard chain. Here is Mr. Stevens' statement that he gave.
He issued the following statement on February 26, I believe it is.
Yesterday, Wednesday, at the conclusion of the luncheon meeting, between
the Republican members of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investiga-
tions, and myself, a memorandum of understanding was issued to the press.
2912 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Because the purpose and meaning of that memorandum have been misin-
terpreted, I wish at this time to make certain things clear. I did not at that
meeting and have not receded at any time from any of the principles upon
which I stand as a civilian head of a body of the most loyal, able, and efficient
men and women that I know ; I have certain obligations to Army commis-
sioned, enlisted, and civilian personnel. These duties include the upholding
of their rights in circumstances where they ai'e unable to protect those rights.
I shall never accede to the abuse of Army personnel under any circumstances,
including committee hearings. I shall never accede to them being browbeaten or
humiliated. I do not intend to allow them to be deprived of the long-established
practice that they have tlie advice of counsel when the matter under considera-
tion is one of essential interest to me as Secretary, as was the case with General
Zwicker. From assurances which I have received from members of the subcom-
mittee, I am confldeut —
and I might add at that point, Mr. Chairman, that Mr. Stevens saw
five members of the subcommittee on the day in question. I also tried
to get hold of Mr. Eogers; I could not; I left for Europe, through
New York, the next day. I repeat Mr. Stevens' statement :
From assurances which I have received from members of the subcommittee,
I am confident that they will not permit such conditions to develop in the
future. In the light of those assurances, although I did not propose the can-
cellation of the hearings, I acceded to it. If it had not been for those assurances,
I would never have entered into any agreement whatsover. I want to make
it perfectly clear that should such abuses occur in any quarter in the future,
I shall once again take all steps at my disposal to protect the rights of individuals
in this Department.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I don't believe that, based on the testimony
of the Secretary of the Army, and the news stories that it is fair
to say that the Democrats are the ones who are responsible for this
scrap between the executive branch of the Government and the legis-
lative branch of the Government.
I would like to just say one more word, if I may, Senator Mc-
Carthy. I didn't intend to bring this up, but I think I will, now.
Senator McCarthy. Proceed.
Senator Symington. You have in your remarks constantly in-
ferred or implied that the Democratic members of this committee
were, for some reason, blocking the investigation of communism.
Let me ask you, what could I get out of blocking the investigation
of communism ? A country that has been wonderful to me. I have
only two sons. One sloughed through the mud of Europe with
General Bradley, and ended up in the Pacific, rose to the rank of
corporal. He has barely started his life. He only started in busi-
ness last year. The other was a marine, younger, and he hasn't yet
been able to start his business career. What would it be in it for
me to have anything to do with Communists? What would be in
it for the great Senator — and he is a great Senator, we all know it —
who sits on my right? I have had my troubles, it is true, but he
has done more, far more, than you and I ever did. He left his oldest
son, God bless him, in north Africa, forever. What have we got,
what interest of ours is it, to coddle Communists?
Senator McCarthy. Is that a question?
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, if I am not out of order, T would
yield my time to Mr. Welch.
Senator McCarthy. Was that a question?
Senator Symington. No, it is no question. It is just an observa-
tion, sir.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2913
Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, my first question to you can be
answered yes or no. Do you think you can pull your mind back to
the facts of this case, and discuss them with me for a moment, or
for 10 minutes?
Senator McCarthy. My mind is on this case.
Mr. Welch. The first thing I want to deal with you about is this:
I gathered from your testimony that you didn't know Dave Schine
until ]\Ir. Cohn brought him to the committee; is that right?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. And I take it you did not know his parents until that
time or later?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. I do gather, from the evidence, that at some time you
did come to know Dave's parents?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. Their names are what?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. and Mrs. Schine.
Mr. Welch. Yes. Their first names?
Senator McCarthy. Meyer Schine is the father and the mother's
name is
Mr. Welch. It is not too important, just the father's.
Senator McCarthy. The mother's name is Hildegard.
Mr. Welch. And they live where?
Senator McCarthy. They live in Gloversville, N. Y.
Mr. Welch. And they have a summer place up there?
Senator McCarthy. I think that is their permanent home. I don't
know.
Mr, Welch. They have a summer place on a lake, or is that home
on a lake ?
Senator McCarthy. It is not on a lake. It is fairly close to a lake.
Mr. Welch. And they have an apartment or at some time did have
an apartment in New York ; is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. The last time I met them, they still had an
apartment in New York.
ISIr. Welch. And you have occasionally been their guests in their
home; is that correct?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Mr. Welch. When would you say was the first time you were the
guest of Mr. and Mrs. Schine, the father and mother of David Schine?
Senator McCarthy. I couldn't give you the date. I know that one
of the other Senators on the committee, and I would just as soon you
wouldn't ask me his name
Mr. Welch. I don't care.
Senator McCarthy. One of the other Senators of the committee and
I were in New York. We had trouble getting a room at the Waldorf,
and either Mr. Colin or Mr. Schine said the Schine apartment is vacant,
and that we could sleep in that. I think that is the first time. I
wouldn't know.
INIr. Welch. Approximately when was that, sir?
Senator McCarthy. I think in — let's see. What hearing would
that have been? It was during the Voice of America hearings. I
think that would be February or March.
2914 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr, Welch, February or March?
Senator McCarthy. Yes,
Mr. Welch. And when next were you their guest, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. I couldn't ^ive you any dates, I have been
in their apartment, I think — this is just a guess, 3 or 4 times, something
like that.
Mr. Welch, Occasionally overnight?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. And occasionally at dinner?
Senator McCarthy. I think I had dinner once with them.
Mr. Welch. Was that a dinner party, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. There were other people at the dinner.
Mr, Welch, And were you at one time their guest at what the press
reported a- the West Caroga Lake Camp of Mr, and Mrs. Schine?
Senator McCarthy. You are referring to their home at Glovers-
ville?
Mr. Welch. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. I was at their home •
Mr. Welch. May I ask if this is correct :
Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, chairman of the Senate Permanent Investigations
Subcommittee, and Roy Cohn, of New York City, chief counsel of the group,
are spending a few days with G, David Schine at the West Caroga Lalve Camp
of Mr. and Mrs. J. Meyer Schine —
that being June 22 of 1953. Is that correct, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I don't think you would call their home a camp.
Mr, Welch. Well, I am only reading what the newspaper printed.
The Senator arrived a couple of days ago and is scheduled to leave the first
part of this week. David Schine said the three investigators are taking a few
days' rest and planning future activities of the committee.
Is it true, Senator, that you were there? A news rej)ort doesn't
make it so, but I would like to know if you were.
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't call it a rest. I was there. We
were working on committee business over the weekend.
Mr. Welch. And so it is fair to say, I
Senator McCarthy. I might say I did do a little resting, too.
Mr. Welch. No one will kick about that.
I judge, then, from what you have told me, that it is fair to say
that your relation with David Schine developed reasonably rapidly
and with a noticeably close social relationship with his family, is that
right ?
Senator McCarthy. I had very little social contact with his family.
I like Dave. I think he Avas a very valuable man.
Mr. Welch. I am not discussing that. Senator. I only want to
know to what extent you became a social guest and visitor with the
Schine family.
Senator McCarthy. Practically not at all. I may say that I have
had practically no social activities since we got into this investigation.
Mr, Welch. Senator, for how many days were you at their home
at Lake Caroga ?
Senator McCarthy. Let's see. I think I went in on Saturday — it
might have been Friday — I went in on Saturday. I left to nuike a
speech in Syracuse on Sunday.
Mr. Welch. And on September IG we know you spent a night at
the Schine apartment, do we not ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2915
Senator McCarthy. I don't think I was in their apartment that
night. I would have to check
Mr. Welch. You were there the night of the 15th, then, sir.
Senator McCarthy. I don't know. I had breakfast, I know, on
the morning of the IGth.
Mr. Welch. Yes, after spending the night before at the Schine
apartment ?
Senator McCarthy. I might well have been. My present thought
is no.
Mr. Welch. And you were there at a dinner party on October 13 ?
Senator McCarthy. No, I don't think so.
Mr. Welch. Was there not a dinner party in the Waldorf, but
not in that apartment, on the night of October 13 at which you were
a guest ?
Senator McCarthy. There was a dinner party. It was not a party
of the Schines.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, at this point, if I might make a short
point of personal privilege, I did not see fit to interrupt Mr. Steven's
erroneous testimony when he gave it. He said that on the night of
October 13, he attended a dinner party given by Mr. and Mrs. Schine,
Dave's parents, and that Senator McCarthy was present and some
other people. That was not true. Mr. and Mrs. Schine did not give
the dinner party. They w^ere not there. They were not present. As
far as I know, they weren't even in New York. Senator McCarthy
had just returned from his honeymoon, and I arranged a get-together
with some of his good friends for him. I think it was the first day
he had returned.
I had Senator and Mrs. McCarthy and Mrs. McCarthy's mother,
and a few of our mutual personal friends. Tlie Senator asked if he
could bring Mr. Stevens along, and he did.
I think Mr. Stevens had called the Senator in Wisconsin over the
weekend and asked the Senator to be his guest at dinner that same
night. The conflict in engagements developed. The Senator asked
if he could bring Mr. Stevens along, and I was very happy to have
Mr. Stevens come along on that occasion.
Mr. and Mrs. Schine did not give the party. They were not present
at the party. Mr. Stevens was in error when he testified here.
Senator Mundt. The Chair understands you gave the party.
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, in any event, I think
Senator Mundt. That will not be taken out of your time, ]Mr.
Welch.
Mr. Welch. In any event, I think it is quite clear that on the niglit
of September 16 you were at the Schine apartment, and that Mr.
Stevens was invited to come there the next morning, on the night of
the 15th and the morning of the 16th.
Senator McCarthy. He was there on the morning of the 15th — the
morning of the 16th. Where I stayed that night, I frankly can't
recall those dates.
Mr. Welch. Did you on that occasion and at that address discuss
with Secretary Stevens a possible commission for G. David Schine?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. Did you refer to that discussion in a telegram of March
12, 1954, which you sent to Mr. Stevens?
2916 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. You would liave to show me the wire, Mr.
Welch.
Mr. Welch. I have it here, and I assume you have a copy.
Senator McCarthy. I don't have a copy here.
Mr. Welch. It can be handed to you, and you may look at it and
you may read it, if you wish, into the record.
(Senator McCarthy examining document.)
Senator McCarthy. Yes. This is apparently an accurate copy
of the wire I sent. Would you like me to read it into the record?
Mr. Welch. You may read it if you would like. I want it in the
record.
Signed "Joe McCarthy."
Senator McCarthy (reading) :
Secretary of the Army Stevens:
In view of news stories tliis morning regards Cohn and Schine, I would
appreciate you would make it clear to the press that the only time you and I
ever discussed the subject of a commission for David Schine was in his presence,
at which time I urged and you fully agreed that his case had to be treated the
same as the case of any other draftee and that we agreed that any other handling
of the case, in view of the investigation of the Army, would be extremely bad
for the committee and the Army and that David Schine was present and fully
agreed with us in this matter.
Mr. Welch. May I have the telegram back now because I will be
wanting to look at it.
Senator McCarthy. Certainly.
Mr. Welch. Throwing your mind back for the moment to that
weekend, if it was a Aveekend, when you w^ere at the Schine home on
Lake Caroga, is it not a fact. Senator, that within a very few days
after that visit on your part you were busy with General Reber in an
effort to procure a commission for G. David Schine ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Welch. At what time did you begin to have some contact with
General Reber in respect to a commission for David Schine?
Senator McCarthy. I couldn't give you the date. Reber has testi-
fied the date he came to the office. I don't recall the date.
Mr. Welch. We know it was early in July, do we not?
Senator McCarthy. It was July 8, Mr. Cohn says.
Mr. Welch. I am sorry.
Senator McCarthy. July 8.
Mr. Welch. Right. It remains true, whether it is significant or not,
that on June 22 you were a guest in his family's home ?
Senator McCarthy. I couldn't give you the date. I told you I was
a guest in the Gloversville home. I can't give you any specific date
as of now.
Mr. Welch. You have told us in your testimony that the one thing
you did about Dave Schine which might not have been fair to him
was to lean over backwards in respect to his having a commission or
any special favors, is that right?
Senator McCarthy. That is incorrect.
Mr. Welch. Would you tell us what is correct ? What did you say ?
Senator McCarthy. I told you that I advised Bob Stevens to lean
over backv.ards in handling the Schine case.
Mr. Welch. You wished yourself to lean over backwards, too, or
not ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2917
Senator McCarthy. I told yon. Mr. AVelch, I told Bob Stevens to
lean over backwards. As far as I was concerned, I did nothing to-
ward procuring a commission for David Schine except to have the
liaison officer explain to him how he would file an application, asked
the liaison officer whether or not he would be entitled to an ap])lica-
tion, and he said yes. I believe you also produced yesterday what you
said was my signature on his application. I think that has been
cleared up. That was incorrect. I signed as a witness a loyalty oath
he took.
Mr. Welch. Was it on the occasion of September 16 that you told
Secretary Stevens that he should lean over backwards?
Senator McCarthy. It was on the morning we had breakfast in
the Schine apartment. I believe the date was the 16th, is that right?
Mr. Welch. Did it not seem to you, Senator, that it was equally
important for you to lean over backwards?
Senator McCarthy. I took no part whatsoever in the obtaining of
any commission, so I didn't have to do any leaning at all.
Mr. Welch. Had you taken any part, you would have wished to
lean over backwards just as you wished the Secretary to ?
Senator McCarthy. I took no part.
Mr. Welch. No, but had you taken any part, if it were to be found
you did anything about it
Senator McCarthy. I just told you that I took no part concerning
the commission.
Mr. Welch. But was it your personal desire, sir, to lean over
backwards ?
Senator McCarthy. If you want to continue this silly harangue we
can. I told you I took no part. I told you exactly what I did in regard
to Dave Schine.
Mr, Welch. Was it your
Senator McCarthy. You say now if I did take a part what would I
have done.
Mr. Welch. Was it your personal desire that you should appear to
lean over backwards about G. David Schine?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has expired.
The witness may answer the question.
Senator McCarthy. The answer is I took no part in obtaining a
commission for Schine.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins?
Mr. Jenkins. Pass.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will pass.
Senator McClellan ?
Senator McClellan. Senator, I will try to hurry through, if we
may. Let's get back to the document. There are just 2 or 3 more
paragraphs that I wish to ask you about. I will read them hurriedly
and try not to dwell on them until we get
Senator McCarthy. Would you give me the page as you read ?
Senator McClellan. Page 11 in this mimeographed copy that I
have, paragraph 19, in which it states :
After mid-September when the chairman directed open hearings on Communist
infiltration in the Army, Mr. Stevens named John G. Adams to the post of Army-
counselor for the principal purpose of "handling the committee," persuading it
to cease its investigation of Communist infiltration in the Army.
I assume you believe that to be true at that time and at the time this
statement was tiled ?
2918 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator McClellan. Then I call your attention to No. 23, on the
next page, and I read it as follows : |
As a part of the attempt to halt the committee's investigation of Communist 1
infiltration in the Army, Mr. Adams frequently and Mr. Stevens on two oc-
casions offered up the Navy, the Air Force and the Defense Establishment proper
as substitute targets as follows —
and then you set forth in some 5 or 6 — in some 8 other paragraphs, I
believe — specific instances in which this attempt was made. Are
those true and correct, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. To the best of my knowledge, they are. May I
say, Senator McClellan, that the November 6 meeting is one that I have
personal knowledge of.
Senator McClellan. You do have personal knowledge of that one ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. That is true, then ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Senator McClellan. Now, No. 32 :
From mid-October through January 1954, Mr. Adams sought on numerous oc-
casions to secure from the chairman and subcommittee staff a promise of
silence if he and Mr. Stevens "broke" General Lawton, commanding general at
Fort Monmouth and relieved him of his command.
Is that one also true, within your personal knowledge ?
Senator McCarthy. That is true.
Senator McClellan. Then I call your attention to No. 46, and I
read it.
The pattern followed by Secretary Stevens and Mr. Adams is clear. As long
as only individual Communists were objects of the subcommittee's investigation,
they made continuing offers of cooperation with the investigation.
I think this one is pretty significant. Senator.
The next sentence then reads :
But as soon as the probe turned to the infinitely more important question of
who was responsible for protecting Communist infiltration, and protecting Com-
munists who had infiltrated, every conceivable obstacle was placed in the
path of tlie committee's search for the truth.
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Senator McClellan. Is that statement true ?
Senator McCarthy. That is true.
Senator McClellan. Now, let me ask you. Senator, 1 or 2 more
questions, and I think I shall have concluded.
As I recall, you testified in your direct examination, possibly, or
somewhere in the course of your examination, that the charges issued
by Mr. Stevens, if believed, against Mr. Cohn and Mr. Schine, particu-
larly Mr. Cohn, would damage their reputation. Is that correct?
Senator McCarthy. There is no question about that. I
Senator McClellan. Then, Senator, if the charges you have made '
against Secretary Stevens and Mr. Adams are true, do they not also
damage their reputations?
Senator McCarthy. It certainly wouldn't enhance their reputa-
tion, I assume. All I am doing here — strike that. '
Senator McClellan. I understand, but Senator, here is what
Senator McCarthy. Yes, I assume the proof here that they have
been trying to call off these hearings won't help the reputation of Mr.
Stevens or Mr. Adams. In
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2919
Senator McClellan. Senator, you have referred to the charges or
the chronological statement of events as well as, if we may term them
that, the formal charges filed with the committee by Mr. Stevens and
Mr. Adams, or those representing them as, if untrue, being smears.
In fact, you contend they are untrue and therefore they are smears?
Senator McCarthy. I not only contend they are untrue, I state
under oath they are untrue, period.
Senator JMcClellan. All right. Then you say those are smears
and that would damage the character of Mr. Colm
Senator McCarthy. Any dishonest allegation of improper conduct
I would call a smear.
Senator McClellan. Yes, and if those charges are untrue, then
they have and would be calculated, certainly, to damage the character
of these people ?
Senator McCarthy. No question about that. I think the best proof
of that. Senator McClellan, is the fact that originally there were no
charges against Mr. Carr. He was just dragged in at the last minute.
There were charges made against him but no evidence submitted what-
soever to substantiate those charges.
Senator McClellan. Yes, sir.
Then, Senator, if these charges made by you against Mr. Stevens
and Mr. Adams, if they are untrue, then they would be smears and
calculated to damage character, too, would they not ?
Senator McCarthy. If they were untrue, it would be a very im-
proper thing to issue them. But they are true, period.
Senator McClellan. I understand that. We are not arguing that.
But they would constitute smears which would damage character?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, if they were untrue.
Senator McClellan. That is what I asked you.
Now, Senator, can you reconcile for me something that I can't un-
derstand, how you could make these charges which are serious to me
in their unport, their nature and consequences, if true, and then recon-
cile them with your testimony that Mr. Stevens is a man of honor and
integrity ?
Senator McCarthy. I said that I knew nothing dishonorable about
Bob Stevens' actions except in regard to the Peress case, in regard to
these charges, period.
Senator McClellan. Well, do you now charge that his charges in
that are dishonest ?
Senator McCarthy. The charges are dishonest, but let me make it
again clear. Senator, and I have repeated this so often I don't like to
bore your audience with it, but Mr. Stevens, you will find from the
monitored calls, protested time and again that he was willing to
testify. He testified that — rather, in a monitored call, you will find
that he said in effect that there is really nothing to these charges.
Now, the thing that remains secret is who induced Stevens in that
2- or 3-day period of time to issue the charges. Whoever did, whoever
did, I think, is dishonest beyond words. That is the
Senator McClellan. Don't you think that Mr. Stevens takes his
responsibilities? He is the man, whether he was duped, influenced, or
naive, or whatever he is, he is the man responsible ?
Senator McCarthy. Well, the man who signed the charges was Mr.
Welch. Who gave Mr. Welch the information, I don't know.
2920 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McClellan, Mr. Welch did not sign the chronological
statement of events. Mr. Welch — that was issued before, and the
formal charges simply reiterate in substance those.
Senator McCarthy. That is not correct. No. 1, the chronological
statement of events were all unsigned, I believe. We find that they
were prepared, according to Mr, Adams' testimony, in conjunction
with 4 or 5 members of the press, who, to put it mildly, certainly
haven't been friendly toward exposure of Communists.
Senator McClellan. Senator, I would have difficulty concluding
that a man was honest and a man of integrity who would issue those
chronological statements of events against me if it were not true.
Senator McCarthy. Senator McClellan, let me say I think the
charges made were extremely dishonest — period. We know that Mr.
Welch signed them. As a lawyer, I assume that he merely got informa-
tion, relied upon that information, and did not think up any of these
charges. That is what a lawyer does.
Who gave him the information, who was responsible for this docu-
ment, I don't know. I tried to get that from Bob Stevens.
Senator McClellan. I am not talking about that document.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish, Senator. I tried to get that
from Bob Stevens. You will recall first he said, "I did not put out
the charges ; I had nothing to do with it," in effect. Then later he said,
"Yes, I put them out." Still later, he said, "No, I did not."
Senator McClellan. Do you agree with me
Senator McCarthy. So I don't know at this point who is respon-
sible.
Senator McClellan. Do you agree with me that he must take the
responsibility, a man in his position and having the responsibility,
that he must accept it for the purpose of these hearings ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, in the chain of command he is the man
who is responsible.
Senator McClellan. He is the man who has the responsible
position.
Senator McCarthy. He has the responsibility, but I don't want
to try to tell you that Bob Stevens knew about this. I don't know.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired.
Senator McClellan. With this statement, Mr. Chairman, I think
I can conclude.
Senator Mundt. All right.
Senator McClellan. I have asked you these questions because I
have been trying to understand how we can regard a man as honest and
a man of integrity who would deliberately and willfully issue a docu-
ment like this chronological events and then follow it up with these
charges before a committee like this, and then still feel, if those charges
are untrue, that the author of them is a man of honor and integrity.
I just couldn't. And if he is trying to stop the investigation of Com-
munists, it strikes at his patriotism, so far as I am concerned.
Senator McCarthy. Could I say in answer to that, Senator, that the
filing of the false and fraudulent charges are a complete contradic-
tion of all I know about Bob Stevens. In all of our contacts, up until
the time these charges were filed in the Zwicker case, I could find
nothing in his conduct that would indicate that he was the type of
man who would file these false charges.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2921
For that reason I can't reconcile the man Stevens that I knew and
worked with with the individual who put out these charoes. Up to
this point, may I say, we are still in the dark on who it was who
dreamed up this most dishonest, this most fraudulent attack which
has now been proven so false. I don't think it was Bob Stevens.
Senator Mundt. Before calling on Senator Dirksen, the Chair has
agreed to recognize Senator Symington for purposes of correcting a
statement he earlier made, and he is assured it is a noncontroversial
correction.
Senator Symington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I said, "What is there in it for us to block communism?" What I
meant to say, of course, was, "What is there in it for us to block the
investigation of communism ?"
I would ask unanimous approval of the committee that that be
corrected.
Senator Mundt. That is quite all right.
Senator McCarthy. I would like to raise a point of personal privi-
lege for Mr. Welch, if I may. It is now 12 : 30. We normally ad-
journ at 12 : 30. I think that both Mr. Welch and I might prefer
having the recess ; right ?
Mr, Welch. It would seem
Senator Mundt. The Chair would be glad to hear you.
Mr. Welch. It would seem so, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. I think it would be well, rather than to continue
until 1 : 00 or 1 : 30.
Senator Dhjksen. Mr. Chairman, may I make a parliamentary
inquiry ?
Senator Mundt. You may.
Senator Dirksen. Insofar as I know, my colleagues Senator Dwor-
shak and Senator Potter have no further questions. I have no further
questions particularly. I wonder, therefore, if the Chair would care to
run through, depending on how long it would take Mr. Welch to com-
plete his examination?
Mr. Welch. I think it is quite clear, both to the Senator and to me,
that it would be sensible to have our regular adjournment. I am de-
termined to close the questioning as promptly as may be when we
resume, and bring the hearing to a conclusion this day.
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes it would be unfair to Mr.
Welch to put him under the pressure of the lunch hour. In all fair-
ness to Mr. Welch, the committee members took more time this morn-
ing than he had anticipated, I am sure, and I believe it would be ap-
propriate if we took the recess and reconvened at 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12:35 p. m., a recess was taken until 2 p. m,, of
the same day.)
INDEX
Page
Adams, John G 2883-2SS7, 2890-2893, 2901, 2903, 2917-2920
Africa 2912
Air Force (United States) 2918
Air Medal 2889
Alsop, Mr 2893, 2899
Andolscliek Y. United States (court decision) 2882
Army (United States) 2883, 2886, 2888-2891, 2894, 2897, 2911, 2912, 2916-2918
Army loyalty board 2883-2887, 2890, 2891
Army personnel 2912
Army's award system 2889
ASY (aviation specialist) 2888
Attorney General of the United States 2892, 2904
Bradley, General 2912
British military 2889
Capitol Police 2881
Carr, Francis P 2910, 2919
Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (United States) 2882
Clifford, Clark 2895, 2896, 2898-2903, 2906, 2910
Cohn, Roy M 28S7, 2890, 2891, 2893, 2899. 2908, 2910, 2912-2916, 2918, 2819
COMAIRSOLS (Commander Aircraft Solomons) 2888
Commander Aircraft Solomons (COMAIRSOLS) 2888
Communist infiltration of the Army 2885, 2917, 2918
Communist Party— 2885, 2886, 2894, 2903, 2904, 2906, 2908-2912, 2917, 2918, 2920
Communists 2885, 2886, 2894, 2903, 2904, 2906, 2908-2912, 2917, 2918, 2920
Communists in defense plants 2906, 2908, 2909
Communists in government 2903
Congress of the United States 2885, 2895, 2896, 2903, 2904
Counselor to the Army 2883-2887, 2890-2893, 2901, 2903, 2917-2920
Daily Worker 2888
Defense Department 2904, 2906, 2907, 2918
Defense Secretary (United States) 2906
Department of the Army. 2883, 2886, 2888-2891, 2894, 2897, 2911, 2912, 2916-2918
Department of Defense 2904, 2906, 2907, 2918
Department of Justice 2890
Dirksen, Senator 2884, 2894
Distinguished Flying Cross 2889
Dworshak, Senator 2921
Eisenhower, President 2903, 2904, 2906, 2911
Eisenhower administration 2903, 2904, 2906
Europe 2895, 2896, 2911, 2912
Executive order 2885
Far East 2894
Fort Monmouth 2918
Foss, Joe 2889
General Motors__. 2904
Gloversville, N. Y 2913, 2914, 2916
Government records 2882
Guadalcanal 2888
Hand, Judge Learned 2882, 2883
Harmon, General 2889
Harris. Field 2889
Hotel Waldorf (New York City) 2913
House of Representatives 2904
Hydrogen bomb plants 2904
Inspector General 2894
II INDEX
Page
Jackson, Senator 2908
Japanese aircraft 2888
Jeanuie (Mrs. McCarthy) 2884, 2915
Justice Department 2890
Kennedy, Robert 2S9~7, 2899
Lawton, General 2898, 2899, 2902, 2918
Loyalty board (Army) 2883-2887, 2890, 2891
MacArthur, General 2888
MacArthur's men 2888
Marine Corps (United States) 2887-2889
Marine Corps officer 2888
Marine dive-bombing squadron 2888
Marine scout bombing squadron 2889
Marshfield, Wis 2884
Marx, Karl 2803
Marx Manifesto 2903
McCarthy, Senator Joe, testimony of 2882-2921
McCarthy, Mrs 2884, 2915
McClellan, Senator 2SS4, 2887, 2895, 2907, 2908
Miller, Steve 2884
Milwaukee, Wis 2887
Monitored telephone calls 2900
Morgan, Mr 2884
Mundt, Senator 2894
Mundt, Mrs 2882
Navy (United States) 2888, 2918
New Guinea 2888
New Ireland 2888
New York City 2888, 2912-2915
New Zealanders 2888
Nimitz, Admiral 2889
Nimitz citation 2889
Oak Leaf Clusters 2889
Pacific 2889, 2912
Parliamentary inquiry 2894
Pentagon 2890
Peress 2894, 2919
Potter, Senator 2894, 2921
President of the United States 2885, 2SS6, 2903, 2904, 2906, 2911
Presidential directive 2886
Presidential order 2885
Quantico, Va 2897
Rabaul, New Ireland 2888
Radar secrets 2885
Reber, General 2916
Republican administration 2903, 2904
Republican Congress 2896
Republican Secretary of the Ariny 2894-2897, 2911
Reserve status 2888
Rogers, Bill 2901, 2912
Schine, G. David 2887, 2890, 2891, 2898, 2899, 2913-2918
Schine, Mrs. Hildegard 2913-2915
Schine, Meyer 2913-2915
Schine apartment 2913, 2915
Schine's parents 2913-2915
Scripps-Howard chain 2911
Secretary of the Army 2890, 2893-2903, 2905, 2910-2912, 2915-2921
Secretary of Defense 2906
Senate of the United States 2896, 2901, 2904, 2907, 2909-2911
Solomons 2888
South Dakota sausage 2884
Stevens, Robert T 2890, 2893-2903, 2905, 2910-2912, 2915-2921
Symington, Senator 2895, 2902, 2903, 2906
Syracuse, N. Y 2914
Trice, Mark 2906, 2907, 2909
INDEX ni
Page
Trurnau, President 2885
Truman order 2S85
United States v. Andolschck (court decision) 2882
United States Air Force 2918
United States Army 2883, 2SSG, 2888-2891, 2894, 2897, 2911, 2912, 2916-2918
United States Army loyalty board 2883-2887, 2890, 2891
United States Attorney General 2892, 2904
United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2882
United States Congress 2885, 2895, 2896, 2903, 2904
United States Department of Defense 2904, 2906, 2907, 2918
United States Department of Justice 2890
United States House of Representatives 2904
United States Marine Corps 2887-2889
United States Navy 2888, 2918
United States President 2S85, 28S6, 2903, 2904, 2906, 2911
United States Secretary of Defense 2906
United States Senate 2896
Valley Forge 2897
Voice of America hearings _ 2913
Waldorf Hotel (New York City) 2913
West Caroga Lake Camp 2914, 2916
Western Pacific 2888
White House 2911
Wilson, Charles 2904, 2906
Zwicker, General 2895, 2896, 2912, 2920
o
/
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES
AND COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRE-
TARY OF THE ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN
G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE HENSEL AND SENATOR
JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and
FRANCIS p. CARR
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-THIED CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PtmSUANT TO
S. Res. 189
PART 71
JUNE 17, 1954
Printed for the use of the Committee ou Government Operations
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
46620° WASHINGTON : 1954
Boston Public Licrary
Superintendent of Documents
NOV 2 4 1954
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JOSEPH K. MCCARTHY, Wiscon.sin, Chainnnn
KARL B. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachus^etts
EVERETT McKINLBY DIKKSEN, Illinois STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland THOMAS A. BUKKE, Ohio
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan SAM J. ERVIN, Jit., North Carolina
Richard J. O'Melia, General CouhkcI
Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk
Special Surcommittee on Investigations
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman
EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
CHARLES E. POTTER, Mirliigan HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
Ray H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel
Thomas R. Prewitt, As^ifitant Counsel
Robert A. Collier, Assistant Counsel
SOLis HOKWiTz, Assistant Counsel
Charles A. Maner, Secretary
CONTENTS
Page
Appendix 2987
Index I
Testimony of —
McCarthy, Senator Joe, United States Senate 2924
EXHIBITS
Introduced Appears
on page on page
42. Excerpts from Tlieses and Statutes of the Commnnist Party— 2976 2987
III
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES AND
COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRETARY OF THE
ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE
HENSEL AND SENATOR JOE MCCARTHY, ROY M. COHN,
AND FRANCIS P. CARR
THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1954
United States Senate,
Special Subcojnimittee on Investigations
OF the Committee on Government Operations,
Washington, D. C.
AFl'ER RECESS
(The hearing was resumed at 2: 15 p. m., pursuant to recess.)
Present : Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota, chair-
man; Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Eepublican, Illinois; Sena-
tor Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan ; Senator Henry C. Dwor-
shak. 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 ; Thomas R. Prewitt,
assistant counsel ; and Charles Maner, assistant counsel.
Principal participants present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a
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 welcome once again the guests who have
come to the committee room to witness these hearings and to be present
at the concluding session of a long series of hearings.
I must again report to our friends in the audience the standing com-
mittee rule, and since we w^ant to move forward with the maximum
dispatch and decorum this afternoon, I want to emphasize it. The
standing committee rule forbids any audible manifestations from the
audience of any kind at any time. That includes any unnecessary
disturbances in the nature of applause or any other type of activity
which might be disturbing to the committee proceedings.
The uniformed members of the Capitol Police force and the plain-
clothes men scattered through the audience, for whom once again the
Chair would like to say they have done a perfectly magnificent job —
those officials have a standing order from the committee to immediately
remove from the committee room any of you who, for reasons best
known to yourselves, elect to eject yourselves by violating the terms
under which you entered the room.
2923
2924 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
As the Chair entered the chamber this afternoon, he observed several
hundred, I believe, people standing in the hall, each wishing he were
where you are now. Consequently, the guards may have that in
mind, so they need have no hesitation about carrying out the Chair's
instruction if any of you should, by some unhappy failure to comply
with the rules of the committee, do anything to disrupt or disturb the
conduct of the hearing in this room.
I am confident that you will continue to give us the splendid coopera-
tion that we have had throughout the hearings.
Subject to being corrected by his colleagues, I believe that Senator
Dirksen had the last 10 minutes; and if that is correct — Senator Jack-
son, had you had your 10 minues ? I am not sure.
Senator Jackson. I will pass.
Senator MuNDT. Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. I pass.
Senator Mundt. The Chair would like to say in behalf of Senator
McClellan that the meeting which he was called to attend this morn-
ing, involving an atomic-energy installation, was resumed at 2 o'clock,
and he thinks he will be with us about 2 : 30. Senator Potter has had
to go back to the conduct of his committee, dealing with the television
industry. Senator Dirksen will be with us shortly.
Do you pass. Senator Dworshak ?
Senator DwoRSHAK. Yes.
Senator Mundt, Do you pass, Mr. Cohn ?
Mr. CoHN. I pass.
Senator Mundt. Very well. Mr. Welch, we start with you. You
have the first 10 minutes.
TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSEPH E. McCARTHY, A UNITED STATES
SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN— Resumed
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. When I was last questioning you, sir, I was questioning
you about the item of leaning over backward in respect to a commission
or other special treatment of any kind for G. David Schine. You had
told me, I think, that you had made it quite clear, or hoped you had
made it clear, that the Secretary at least was to lean over backward.
Is that right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. That is what I advised the Secretary.
Mr. Welch. I was asking you, I think — and I don't believe you had
yet made it that clear to me — whether or not you yourself had a deter-
mination to lean over backward on that point.
Senator McCarthy. I didn't do any leaning.
Mr. Welch. You didn't lean over backward?
Senator McCartpiy. I didn't lean at all.
Mr. Welch. Either way ; is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Mr. Welch. Either forward or backward ?
Senator McCarthy. That is correct.
Mr. Welch. On the occasion when you wired Mr. Stevens in respect
to this matter, on March 12, 1954, you did not make any reference to
the fact that you had asked him to lean over backward ; is that right,
Senator?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2925
Senator McCarthy. You have the wire before you, have you not?
Mr. Welch. That is right, and you read it this morning.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. Simihu"ly, when you wrote him on December 22, 1953,
a letter which is in evidence and to which I will return again, you did
not mention that fact, did you. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. Wait a minute until I get the letter, will you ?
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. Your question was
Senator Mundt. Time in again.
Senator McCarthy. Did I ask Stevens to do any leaning in this
letter ? I don't believe so.
Mr, Welch. The question is. You didn't say anything about it in
that letter, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. No; but I made my position very clear.
Mr. Welch. I take it the letter of December 22 — and again I will
come back to it at another time — was a pretty carefully prepared
letter, was it not ?
Senator McCarthy. It is one of the many letters I dictate.
Mr. Welch. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. I signed it. I knew what was in it.
Mr. Welch. Right.
Senator McCarthy. I have no apology for it.
Mr. Welch. I am not suggesting that you apologize, but my ques-
tion is whether or not it was a reasonably carefully prepared letter.
Senator McCarthy. I think all the work in my office is carefully
prepared.
Mr. Wp:lch. That again would have been an appropriate time to
record this oral statement of yours that Secretary Stevens should lean
over backward ; was it not ?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Welch. You could have done it, Senator. I mean if you read
it, it would have taken only a line or two to remind him of that fact?
Senator McCarthy. Could I have done what?
Mr. Welch. You could have reminded the Secretary of the fact
that you had told him orally that you wanted him to lean over back-
ward in respect to G. David Schine?
Senator McCarthy. I could have put that in the letter ; yes.
Mr. Welch. And you didn't.
Senator McCarthy. I only put in the letter what is before you.
Mr. Welch. Yes. Did you think of doing it. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Think of asking him to lean over backward?
Mr. Welch. No ; of recording the fact that you had asked him to
lean over backward.
Senator McCarthy. I didn't put it in the letter. I don't think that
there is any debate in my mind as to what I should put in this letter.
Mr. Welch. Did you think of it at that time?
Senator McCarthy. Oh, I wouldn't know.
Mr. Welch. Sir?
Senator McCarthy. Do you mean did I think of the December 16
conversation ?
Yes ; I am sure I did. I was aware of the fact that I had told Bob
Stevens not to give Dave Schine any special consideration.
Mr. W^elch. And were you thinking
2926 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I told him to lean over backward so he wouldn't
be criticized.
Mr. Welch. And were you thinking of that fact when you dictated
the letter ?
Senator McCarthy. I assume that I most likely remembered that
conversation at the time.
Mr. Welch. And thought about it ; is that right, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know what I thought about besides
what is in the letter. I dictate too many of these in the course of one
day, Mr. Welch, to tell you what else I may be thinking about besides
what I dictate. I think the letter is very complete.
Mr. Welch. Except, let us say, for this point.
Senator McCarthy. I think it is very complete.
Mr. Welch. Now to go back for a moment to the summer and au-
tumn of 1953. May I remind you once again of the dates? On June
22, you were a guest of the Schine family. On September 15 you
were at the Schine apartment, and Mr. Stevens
Senator McCarthy. September 16, the morning of the 16th.
Mr. Welch. Well, it is the night of the 15th, I believe, that you
were at the apartment and met Mr. Stevens there on the morning of
the 16th?
Senator McCarthy. I met him on the morning of the 16th. As I
told you, I may well have stayed in the Schine apartment, that is, the
apartment of Mr. and Mrs. Meyer Schine, not Dave's apartment
Mr. Welch. Eight.
Senator McCarthy. I may well have stayed in that the night before.
I don't remember.
Mr. Welch. And on October 13 of that year, there was a dinner
jDarty at which G. David Schine was a guest. Do you remember ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes; Dave and his young lady were at the
party.
Mr. Welch. And Mr. Cohn and I think his family were guests or
were giving the party.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn was giving the party. It was a party
being given for Jeannie — for Mrs. McCarthy and me. We had just
returned from our honeymoon.
Mr. Welch. And do you remember that there was an arrangement
made or that Mr. Stevens testified that he was driven downtown the
next morning by G. David Schine ?
Senator McCarthy. I think that was his testimony.
Mr. Welch. Doesn't it strike you, Senator, that there was some
kind of a concerted move on at that time to try to get a commission
for G. David Schine ?
Senator McCarthy. No ; the opposite is true.
Mr. Welch. Do you mean there w^as a move to avoid giving him
one?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I have told you so many times
now that I know it must be boring to our listeners. I told you that Mr.
Stevens brought up the question of a commission. I told Bob Stevens,
in view of the fact that we were investigating Communist infiltration
of the Army, infiltration which he inherited, not which he was re-
sponsible for, that I thought it would be a mistake if he did anything
which could be misconstrued by those elements of the press and radio
which had beL'n opposing any exposure of Communists. In the pres-
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2927
ence of Dave Schine and Roy Colin, I sufigested that he lean over
backward in any decision he made in regard to Dave Schine. He ap-
parently has leaned over very, very far backward, because Dave
Schine is still a private. He has had no consideration of any kind,
and rightly so, except he wa>j given the right to take his hours, time
off, and do committee work.
Mr. Welch. In that connection. Senator, are you aware of the fact
that Mr. Stevens himself has a son 21 months or more abroad, who is a
corporal only?
Senator McCarthy. I am aware of the facts about Mr. Stevens' son ;
yes. I will not discuss them unless you insist upon that.
Mr. Welch. Are you aware of his rank, sir?
Senator McCaktiiy. I am aware of the fact that he was a corporal
when we last heard about him.
Mr. Welch. Right.
Now, let me ask you about G. David Schine only, quite aside from
talking to you about the Secretary. From your observation of
G. David Schine and your conversations with him, did you get
the impression that G. David Schine was extremely hopeful that
he would have a commission?
Senator McCarthy. I think that Dave was anxious to get a com-
mission.
Mr. Welch. Very anxious ?
Senator McCarthy. I think he had the normal attitude of any
young man who is going into the military. I think he wanted a
commission. I think there is no question about that.
Mr. Welch. And did you observe on his part a plan to secure
whatever assistance he could within the limits of propriety from you,
sir?
Senator McCarthy. He asked for no assistance from me.
Mr. Welch. Well, he was not unwilling to take
Mr. McCarthy. Except, let me qualify that, except he asked me
to have the liaison officer of the Senate, Mdio, as I explained, has
an office over here and works with every Senator, he asked could
I have the liaison officer give him the details of where he should
apply, how he should apply, what possible openings there might be.
I think the first application he made was with Transport, because
of his background of experience in that.
Mr. Welch. Did he know that you were talking to General Reber
on his behalf?
Senator McCarthy. Not in his behalf.
Mr. Welch. Did he know you were talking to General Reber?
Senator McCarthy. He knew that I had asked Rebar to give him
the technical information as to how to apply, and that I had asked
Reber whether or not he was entitled to a commission.
Mr. Welch. Now to go back for a moment — I think I will pass
that.
I would like to ask you, if I may, 1 or 2 things about your filing
system. They have been inquired into somewhat by others here.
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. Do I understand. Senator, that some of the files that
are strictly or really committee files are kept in your office, meaning
your senatorial office?
40020°— 54— pt. 71 2
2928 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Wrlcii. Where do you keep the documents like the 214-page
document that we had here?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I was of the opinion that was
down in the committee files. However, I heard Mr. Carr testify-
to the effect that it was not; that it was in my office. I will take
Mr. Carr's testimony on that, because I am sure he is right in that.
Mr. Welch. That you would consider an important document,
would you not?
Senator McCarthy. Important, but not important beyond many
documents we get.
Mr. Welch. You wouldn't allow it to lie around carelessly, would
you. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. It did not lie around carelessly.
Mr. Welch. I want to ask about that. Have you a safe in your
office?
Senator McCarthy. I have.
Mr. Welch. Was that document kept in that safe ?
Senator McCarthy. Apparently it was, Mr. Welch. May I say,
I wasn't aware of that until I heard Mr. Carr testify to that, and I
checked with Mrs. Driscoll and she tells me that document was in my
safe rather than in the committee files.
Mr. Welch. In your safe, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. May I ask who has access to your safe; others than
you, or not ?
Senator McCarthy. My administrative assistant has access. Mrs.
Driscoll has. I, of course, have. I don't think anyone else has the
combination.
Senator Mundt. Your time has expired, Mr. Welch. We will be
back to you soon, I believe.
Mr. Jenkins, have you any questions ?
Mr. Jenkins. I pass.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will pass. Senator McClellan and Sen-
ators to my right? Senators to my left ? Mr. Colin?
Mr. Welch, another 10 minutes.
Mr. W^elch. It has also ap])eared. Senator, that at the time Mr. G.
David Schine was at Camp Dix, some of the files of the committee
were in Mr. Cohn's home. Did you hear that testified to ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Cohn tells me that when they were
working on the reports in New York, he took to New York material
which he needed to work on those reports.
Mr. W^elch. And some in Mr. Schine's home ?
Senator McCarthy. I understand yes.
Mr. Welch. And some in Mr. Schine's office ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know about that.
Mr. Welch. I think that was so testified to. If you will ask Mr.
Cohn, I think he will confirm that fact.
Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to.
Mr. Cohn says "Yes," there was material in Dave's office.
Mr. Welch. I take it those files — I am not too clear about what was
in New York— but I gather from what has been said about them that
at least to some extent those files contained information from private
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2929
informers. Will you ascertuin from Mr. Cohn whether or not that
is so ?
Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. Welch, that I have a standing
rule that my staff avoid puttiniy the names of any (xovernment em-
ployees who give us information in the files, unless that is absolutely
Jiecessary.
Your question is, will I ask Mr. Cohn whether or not there are any
such names in those files ?
Mv. Welch. I don't think you need to, in view of what you say to
us now. What you say makes me address this inquiry to you. You
speak of Government employees as informers. I gather, Senator
Senator McCarthy. Let's use the word "informants" instead of
'"informers."
Mr. Welch. You know what I mean by the word, don't you ?
Senator McCarthy. Except I use the word "informant" rather
than "informer."
Mr. Welch. Well, maybe I could use the word "informant." I
don't see any grave distinction between them. You speak of an in-
formant as though they are chiefly in Government service, is that cor-
rect or not ?
Senator McCarthy. I would say "Yes," we get most of the informa-
tion in regard to Avrongdoing from people who are in Government.
]\Ir. Welch. Are any of them — think about this a moment before
you answer. It may seem obscure. Are any of them anonymous to
you in the sense that even you do not know their names ?
Senator McCarthy. We receive anonymous tips. Some of them
have proved to be completely of no value.
JNIr. Welch. Of course.
Senator McCarthy. Some prove to be of some value.
Mr. Welch. Yes. I am thinking more as to whether or not you
actually have informers whose identities they conceal from you,
although you know them as a person.
Senator McCarthy. You mean, have I discussed any matter, get
information from anyone and have them conceal their name from me?
Mr. Welch. Eight.
Senator McCarthy. The answer is no.
Mr. Welch. "No" to that. One or two other questions along this
line.
Would you be embarrassed. Senator — and just say so if you are — •
would you be embarrassed if I ask you to tell us the approximate num-
ber of such informers?
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't be embarrassed, but I couldn't tell
you.
Mr. Welch. Does it run into scores ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I would not be able to tell you.
As you know, I think, in any investigative agency each investigator
has his own people who give him information. I never ask any of
my investigators for the names, the number of people who give them
information. I am merely concerned about their getting information
about wrongdoing which I think should be made public.
Mr. Welch. If you had said to mej Senator, that you would be em-
barrassed to reveal the number, I think I could quickly respect your
wish.
Senator McCarthy. I would not be embarrassed.
2930 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. But since you are under no embarrassment
Senator McCarthy. No embarrassment.
Mr. Welch. I wish you would give us a notion as of today, let us
say, of the number of informants of that sort in Government service
that there are.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, take Mr. Juliana back here, one of
my very excellent investigators, take Mr. Frank Carr here, Mr. E.oy
Cohn— I know they all get information from various people, informa-
tion about wrongdoing which the American people are entitled to
have. I don't have the slightest conception of how many people con-
tact any one of these young men. We have a total of 14 investigators.
Is that right, Koy 'i
We have a total of 14 investigators. How many people give them
information I just don't know.
Mr. Welch. I am speaking now only of yours. Can you tell us
some notion of how many informants there are who report directly to
you ?
Senator McCarthy. That would be impossible. I think after the
6-percent investigation, the investigation of 5-percenters in Govern-
ment, and the Government employees then learned that their iden-
tities would not be made public if they gave us information about
wrongdoing, we started to get information then. As to the number,
I don't know. After the Tydings hearings, when Mr. Tydings and
others tried to force me to give the names of those who were giving us
information, and I assured the people in Government that their names
Mould not be given, the flow of information increased again. I frank-
ly could not give you any idea, Mr. Welch, of the number of people
who supply me with information.
Mr. Welch. Would you think it was more than a hundred,
Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I would not guess.
Mr. Welch. Now may I ask you this ? You have had the opportu-
nity to extend over the radio and television an invitation to Govern-
ment employees to come to you since these hearings have been going on.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. Can you tell us whether advertising pays or not ?
Senator McCarthy. To tell you the truth, I have not had an oppor-
tunity to examine my mail, to meet people who offer information. As
I go out of this room I think I was buttonholed about three times today
by individuals who appeared to be good, honest people who said they
had information to give me. I had to tell them that I couldn't talk to
them until after this was over. What the result of my assurance to
the Government employees that their names will be protected, or how
much more information we will get on wrongdoing and communism, I
don't know. I just hope there is an increase in the flow of information.
Mr. Welch. You trouble me at one point. You say your mail has
piled uj) and is not unopened, is not opened ?
Senator McCarthy. No; I didn't say that. I said I personally
didn't have a chance to examine my mail. I have a very efficient staff.
I think — you give me a good opportunity now, Mr. Welch, to explain
to people why their letters are not answered. It is completely impos-
sible to answer the mail that comes to our office. I am glad that my
television viewers will know that there is just no way on earth, with
the small office staff, that I can answer all of the mail. We try and
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2931
sort out the mail from Wisconsin. I think my staff does a pretty good
job of answering that.
Senator Mundt. Would you generalize that statement for your
seven colleagues at the committee table who also have a lot of mail?
Senator McCarthy. I am sure that is true. In fact, I am sure that
Mr. Jenkins, from what I hear, has had a vast amount of mail. I am
sure that doing the job he has been doing, he has been unable to even
open a great number of those letters
Mr. Jenkins. Except from Tennessee.
Senator McCarthy. I hope that your people back in Tennessee
realize it is not lack of a desire to answer them. I think that is true
of all the Senators. But there is no possibility of doing it.
Mr. Welch. Senator, you have given me a chance to say something
about a guy named Welch. I, sir, have a little trickle of mail, a trickle
I would say, compared to yours, and I am very happy to say some of
it says that it seems to them I am quite a good lawyer, and some of them
say about the best they ever heard. But in either event, whether they
praise me or blame me. I haven't had a chance to answer them either,
and I guess they will all understand now.
As to you. Senator, as to Mr. Cohn, who I happen to know has had a
very heavy mail, and I am sure as to everyone on this side of the table,
it has not been possible to do the work that we have had to do and
answer that mail.
Senator McCarthy. Could I say, Mr. Welch, to those who say that
you are a good lawyer, I would like to add to that, while this is not a
"Be kind to Welch day" that I think that you have fought this law-
suit, if 3"ou can call it that, in a good, hard, rough fashion. It is the
American tradition. You and I might disagree on what you might do
some day, and what I might do some day, but I think you fought a
very good fight with an impossible case.
Mr. Welch, I don't know whether we are actually cast in the roles
of adversary or not, but I might turn it around and say you fought
an excellent fight with what I hope, sir, and I believe to be, a losing
case. I was inquiring about your mail only in this respect, although
it gave us an opportunity to say something about it, it would make me
uneasy to think that in all that huge mail, to which so little attention
is given, we have any of these confidential documents bouncing around.
Do you suppose there are. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't say so little attention is given to it.
I believe we receive — I think the last estimate was around seven or eight
thousand letters a day. I have got, I think, eight girls in the office.
Obviously, they cannot answer all those letters. We try and give the
mail the best possible attention. I think my office staff is doing just
an outstanding job.
Mr. Welch. Are those girls sufficiently trained so that if a confi-
dential FBI document from some disgruntled employee bounced in,
they w^ould know what it was ?
Senator McCarthy. No. 1, let's not talk about a disgruntled em-
ployee. If anyone knows of wrongdoing, he doesn't have to be dis-
gruntled
Mr. Welch. Let's say he is patriotic, if you wish.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish this, Mr. Welch. This is a very
important point. You have tried to intimate that those who give us
information of wrongdoing are disgruntled. Mr. Welch, all these
2932 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senators at the table here, inchKliii<:^ myself, have been given the
highest job this Nation can ofler, that is, to man the watchf owers of the
Nation. Anybody who knows of wrongdoing owes an absolute duty
to bring the information to us. It is not a case of being disgruntled,
it is a case of loyalty. Many of them risk their jobs, risk their jobs, to
do that.
Mr. Welch. We have been all through that. Senator, and I think
we would only tire each otlier and those that listen to us
Senator McCarthy. We will go through it again each time you
refer to them as disgruntled.
Mr. Welch. Let's say that we have an unhappy employee or one
that thinks his boss doesn't move swiftly enough. That is where the
pinch comes with me. Senator, on this scheme of yours. There may
be cases where patience is required to catch Communists. You can
understand such a situation, can't you ?
Senator INTcCarthy. I have no patience with a Communist handling
secrets. I will not have any patience.
Senator Mundt, Mr. Welch, your time has expired. We hope to
get back to you shortly.
Mr. Jenkins, any questions?
Mr. Jenkins. I pass.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will pass.
Any Senators to my left ?
Any to my right?
INlr. Cohn ?
Mr. Welch, you have another 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. I think, Senator, you either misunderstood me or
purposely changed what I said. I said tliere can be circumstances
where, in the pursuit of Communists or subversives, patience is a great
virtue. Is that not right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Kight.
Mr. Welch. And you answered me by saying you have no patience
with Communists. I haven't, either, sir. But when it comes to track-
ing them down, finding out who their friends are, finding out whether
they may actually have espionage features instead of merely subver-
sive or poor security risk features, patience sometimes is required,
isn't it?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, if I may, instead of giving you a
yes or no answer I think the patience with Alger Hiss, 10 years of
patience, the patience with Harry Dexter White, has done unlimited
damage to this Nation. I think there are a great number of young
men dead today because of that patience, if you want to call it that.
Mr. Welch. It was more than
Senator McCarthy. As far as I am concerned, I have no patience
with a man who is guilty of treason. I will agree with you, however,
that in tracking down Communists, that sometimes the investigation
may be long, may be tedious, it may t'ake months and months.
Mr. Welch. That is right, sir.
Now you have said what I hoped you would say, because that is
quite obvious. My trouble. Senator, comes at this point : If you have
a fretful, impetuous employee, who sees an FBI document in his
boss' hands and doesn't see immediate results, I get a little nervous
about that fretful, im})etuous fellow, for fear he will shoot it over to
you before his boss luus had a chance to be patient about tracking down
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2933
the Communists. Do you ever have any uneasiness on that point,
Senator?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch
Mr. Welch. Is the answer that you do or don't?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, unless and until you can give us
one iota of evidence showing that we have been too impetuous in ex-
posing Communists, we have been too impatient, the question is a moot
question. We take each piece of information we get. We evaluate it.
And up until this time, Mr. Welch, may I say while we have been here
for 36 days, no one has accused us of exposing a Communist who should
not have oeen exposed. No one has accused us of calling a witness who
should not have been called.
Now, your question, and I am sure you don't mean it that way, your
question intimates that maybe we have been rushing into things
blindly. If we have been, I am sure that the Senators here and you
would have exposed that fact long before this closing day.
Mr. Welch. Senator, you just missed my question
Senator McCarthy. I don't think I had.
Mr. Welch. And we passed each other in the dark. I am not talk-
ing about your impatience, sir. You have never exposed a Communist
too suddenly for me or too suddenly for Mr. Robert Stevens.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you.
Mr. Welch. I am talking about the guy who may have a copy of the
document, and he is a little fretful and a little hurried and he may
hand it around to someone like you when patience above him is a
virtue rather than a sin. That at least could happen, couldn't it,
Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I don't follow you at all, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. If you don't you don't. May I ask you something else.
Senator. Will you think it over a moment ?
Senator McCarthy. I will think it over as long as you want to. May
I say that any person in the Government who knows of communism
and knows of treason and knows there is no action being taken, I think
he should get impatient, extremely impatient. I think he should
bring the information to the proper committee.
Mr. Welch. One other question Senator, and I guess I won't charm
you with it. It makes me
Senator McCarthy. I don't think you will charm me.
Mr, Welch. Are you ever in any sense uneasy about this system
of informants on which your committee relies so much?
Senator McCarthy. I am uneasy because more people in Govern-
ment don't have the loyalty and don't have the guts to give the proper
committees the information which we should have.
Mr, Welch. Do you understand my saying that I personally wish
there were other good ways to do it in addition to having us spy on
each other? It seems a little uncomfortable.
Senator McCarthy. If you can suggest, Mr. Welch, how we could
expose these Communists in a more delicate fashion, if you can suggest
some way of getting information other than the coworkers of traitors,
if you can suggest, Mr. Welch, that we have exposed a single Com-
munist who should not have been exposed, then maybe we can get on
with this questioning. But up to this point, Mr. Welch, as I listen to
your questioning, you are intimating that there is something wrong
about the head of an investigating committee. I was elected head of
2934 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
this committee by unanimous vote of the Senate. It is the watchdog
committee. We call it that. Our job, Mr. Welch, is to dig out com-
munism, corruption, treason, anything which is improper. When you
suggest that a person is a spy because he gives us, the representatives
of the people, information on wrongdoing, Mr. Welch, I think you
are inadvertently doing a great disservice to those loyal Govermnent
employees.
Ivlr. Welch. Senator, it is not my business to blow the bugle of other
people in Government, but the administration does boast of the fact
that quietly and steadily and surely they, too, are rooting out Com-
munists and Communist sympathizers. You must have heard that,
haven't you ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I think
Mr. Welch. And it must be true, isn't it?
Senator McCarthy. I think the record of this administration has
been rather impressive.
Mr. Wklch. Senator, since I am determined to reach at least some
things in your examination that seem to me of some importance, I
wish to turn to the matter of General Lawton.
You will recall. Senator, that there were two sets of dates in respect
to General Lawton which seem to be of importance. The first two
sets of dates are November 24 and 25, and then December 16 and 17.
Do you agree to that, sir?
Senator McCarthy. I was trying to get the date when General Law-
ton first appeared, and in getting that I missed what you said, Mr.
Welch.
Mr. WcLcri. I tliink he first appeared on October 14, but the dates
to which I am attracting your attention and about which T wish to
talk to you are the dates when Mr. Adam.s came to New York and
talked to you, and certainly on the 10th and I7th, or on the 17th, talked
to you and ]\Ir. Carr and Mr. Cohn, and when he came to New York
on November 24 and 25 and talked to you and to Mr. Colin about
General Lawton.
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. Do you remember those two sets of dates ?
Senator McCarthy. I recall those two sets of dates. Would you
wait until I get my memorandum on that?
Mr. Welch. Lideed, sir. I should like you to have it.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. I think you will want to question on that.
Yes, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Have you such memoranda before you now as will aid
you in refreshing your recollection ?
Senator McCarthy. I have a memorandum dated December 17,
1953.
Mr. Welch. That is the one, one of your released memoranda.
Senator McCarthy. That is one that was dictated on the evening
of the IGth.
Mr. Welch. Yes. I am turning our attention first, Senator, to the
dates November 24 and 25. Do you remember those dates?
Senator McCarthy. Do I remember the dates?
]Mr. Welch. In this connection, and with Mr. Adams in New York
and talking about General I^awton, and with the telephone call from
Ad;uus. You were approached as to what your attitude would be if
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2935
he were relieved, and a telephone call from Adams to Stevens, and
all that story. Are you familiar with that, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. That was November 24. Just a second. I
think we had
Mr. Welch. I suggest that you confer with Mr. Cohn.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. I want to check on the earliest date on Lawton.
(Senator McCarthy and Mr, Cohn conferring.)
Senator McCarthy. I was trying to get the dates straight here.
Senator Mundt. Time back in.
Senator McCarthy. The 24th date, Mr. Welch, was the date that
I made a broadcast answering some statements made by the former
President.
Mr. Welch. That is right. And I think you talked to Mr. Adams
on that day or on the next day, or perhaps both.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr, Adams, as I recall, came to the
studio
Mr. Welch. Eight.
Senator McCarthy, Where I was making the broadcast.
Mr. Welch. If you would look. Senator, I can tell you a place or
two to look in the record where you can get some refreshm.ent of your
recollection.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you.
Mr. Welch, If you will look at volume 22.
Senator McCarthy, Volume 22.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. What page ?
Mr. Welch. 4048.
Mr. Cohn is testifying, and you observe his name appearing at the
very top of the page, do you. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I do.
Mr. Welch. Then a second time down 4 inches.
Senator McCarthy, Right,
Mr, Welch. And the second paragraph of that statement by Mr.
Cohn I will read to you, I will read you the tail end of the first
paragraph in which Adams is supposecl to have said to Mr. Cohn :
"I have some news which I am going to have to break gently to Senator
McCarthy."
Then Mr. Cohn went on to testify :
I asked him what it was. He said to me, "We are now at a point where we are
going to get down to business about getting rid of Lawton." He said he had
word from Mr. Stevens, and that they planned to relieve General Lawton of his
command by the next day.
Senator McCarthy. Will you slow up a minute until I find where
you are reading ?
Mr. Welch, I am awfully sorry. I thought you were with me.
Senator McCarthy. Pardon me. Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Welch. Let's go over it again, Senator, because I do want
you to have it in mind.
Senator McCarthy. You are starting — pardon me. Go ahead.
Mr. Welch. This is Mr. Cohn saying — I want to go over just the
last end of it again — Mr. Cohn is saying, you will see a quote, "I have
some news," about the middle of the page.
46620°— 54— pt. 71 3
2936 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I am listening to you, sir.
Mr. Welch. Are you ready for me, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. It is quite proper that you do that, Mr. Cohn.
Senator McCarthy. I wouldn't say I am ever completely ready for
you.
Mr. Welch. There is a quotation from Mr. Cohn's testimony quot-
ing Adams to this effect :
"I have some news which I am going to have to breali gently to Senator
McCarthy."
Are you with me now, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
I asked him what it was. He said to me, "We are now at a point where we
are going to get down to business about getting rid of Lawton." He said he had
word from Mr. Stevens, and that they planned to relieve General Lawton of
his command by the next day.
Will you turn the page over to 4049. Are you there, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. I am.
Mr. Welch. Now running your eye up from the bottom of the page
until you see the name "Mr. Cohn."
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. And you see the words "the first thing" ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
The first thing he said on November 24 — he might have given detail, I don't
know— was that Mr. Stevens had made concrete plans to remove General
Lawton ; that Mr. Stevens had it very much on his mind and was very anxious
to get rid of General Lawton and intended to do so, hoped to be able to do so
the next day, but that he first wanted Mr. Adams to broach the subject with
Senator McCarthy and wanted to know whether or not Senator McCarthy would
make a public issue out of General Lawton's dismissal.
Do those two sections of the record. Senator, plus your talk with
Mr. Cohn, refresh your recollection as io those two dates November
24 and 25 in respect to General Lawton ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't neeed to have it refreshed.
Mr. Welch. You now have it well in mind, is that right?
Senator McCarthy. I think fairly well in mind.
Mr. Welch. Where would you say that John Adams first spoke with
you about this then plan to remove General Lawton on the next day?
Was it at the broadcasters after the broadcast?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I frankly don't know just where
and when John Adams first brought up the subject. I know that
Adams made it clear, shortly after General Lawton appeared the first
time
Mr. Welch. I am talking
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish. I know you want the informa-
tion. I am trying to give you all I can. I can't give you the day or
what particular time of the day. General Lawton appeared on October
14, I believe.
Mr. Welch. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. And at that time, I think that was the day he
was asked why he did not get the people with Communist records out
of Fort Monmouth before we started our investigation. I can't quote
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2937
him verbatim, but in effect he said, "It was not until this committee
started to act."
From that time onward, it was very clear that Mr, Adams was not
hapjDy with General Lawton. Now, you will ask me to say when, where,
what he said. I frankly can't give you any specific time or place
because John Adams and I and Roy and Frank, and other people, had
lunch almost every day, we had dinner many evenings during these
hearings, and it was a thing that just sort of grew. I know on the
night of the 24th, when I was over to make this broadcast, answering
Mr. Truman, Mr. Adams then brought up the question of the imminent
removal of General Lawton.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has expired. I hope to be
back to you shortly.
Mr. Jenkins. Pass.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan asked me to pass for him.
Any Senators to my left ? To my right ?
Mr. Cohn ?
Mr. Welch, you have another 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Senator, there is no trickery here pending
Senator McCarthy. I am sure you wouldn't ask a trick question.
Mr. Welch. And which has to do with whether you heard it in the
morning or noon or night of the 24th. I do wish to know what your
recollection is as to when you heard it, if you can summon a recollec-
tion. Bear in mind, Senator — strike that out. At what time of the
night or of the evening was your broadcast?
Senator McCarthy. Let's see, I believe it was 9 o'clock, 8: 30 — no,
I believe it was 11 o'clock eastern standard time.
Mr. Welch. How long a broadcast?
Senator McCarthy. Half an hour, I think.
Mr. Welch. And after that, you and Mr. Adams and others, is that
right, and Mr. Cohn, and who else, if anyone?
Senator McCarthy. We had a number of people there, or a number
of people present.
Mr. Welch. 1 think Frank Carr among them, was he not?
Senator McCarthy. I think Frank was there. You weren't there,
were you, Jim. I think Frank Carr and Mr. Cohn were the only
members of the staff.
Is that right, Roy?
Mr. Welch. And where were you ? There is no difficulty in saying
where you were, is there ?
Senator McCarthy. None whatsoever. It was at the broadcasting
station. I don't know the address. I gave that to the cab driver who
took us over.
Mr. Welch. In any event, at least that early, as I understand it, the
testimony from Mr. Cohn and from Mr. Carr, and now from you, and
perhaps earlier from you, at least on that evening or by the time that
the whole day was ended, you had learned, had you not, that this pro-
posed relief of General Lawton at Fort: Monmouth was certainly
imminent in the sense of being hotly considered by Stevens ?
Senator McCarthy. I knew they were threatening then. I frankly,
Mr. Welch, did not believe that they were going to do it.
Mr. Welch. Well, I only
Senator McCarthy. I didn't think they could.
2938 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. I have read you Mr. Cohn's testimony to the effect, in
two places, that he said they were considering malting the removal
the very next day.
Senator McCarthy. There is no question he said that, but, as I say,
I had talked to Mr. Adams so often and had been— he had tried—
a very good salesman, John is— had tried so often in trying to call
off these hearings, that I never knew when he was bluffing and when
he was serious.
Mr. Welch. Well, in any event, you knew full well that he appeared
to be instructed by Stevens to find out what your attitude would be if,
to use the phrase you have used here, they busted Lawton, is that
right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. He appeared to be, but, may I say, that I did
not take the threat too seriously.
Mr. Welch. You took it seriously enough so you stated what you
would do if they did it, did you not, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I am very sorry, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. I am a little embarrassed. If you would prefer me to
wait when I see you talking to Mr. Cohn, I will be very glad to do so.
Senator McCarthy. 1 may say I will have to talk to Mr. Cohn con-
stantly about th3 I<awton matter because most of the conversations
on Lawton were between Mr. Adams and Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Welch. Now would you read that last question, Mr. Eeporter ?
Senator Mundt. Read the question, Mr. Reporter.
(The reporter read from his notes as requested.)
Mr. Welch. Do you understand that question ?
Senator McCartpiy. I don't think I stated what I would do.
Mr. Welch. In any event, you indicated that you would not keep
quiet, did you not ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't believe I talked about keeping quiet. I
made it very clear that I knew that if they broke Lawton it would be
because of his cooperation with the committee.
Mr. Welch. And that you were going to raise a ruckus about it ?
Senator McCarthy. I never raised a ruckus.
Mr. Welch. Well, you were going to do something in true McCarthy
style to indicate you didn't approve of firing Lawton, isn't that right,
sir ?
Senator McCarthy. You and I might differ about what true
McCarthy style is.
Mr. W^ELCH. I have never observed it to be overly quiet, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. I thought— No, I frankly didn't pay too much
attention to that conversation.
]Mr. Welch. In any event, you said enough to John Adams
Senator McCarthy. I let John know that I would consider any
action taken against General Lawton as a reprisal for his cooperation.
Mr. Welch. Well, and in your presence, on the next afternoon,
John Adams telephoned Secretary Stevens and said in substance
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir?
Mr. Welch. And said in substance, "You aren't going to get off easv
with the Senator if you fire Lawton?"
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I Avas present when Mr. Adams called the
Secretary and— I don't recall the conversation except he indicated that
I realized the reason for the attempted breaking of Lawton.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2939
Mr. Welch. And it follows from what you have just testified to,
does it not, Senator, that on that occasion, whatever you said was
enough to shut Adams up for at least a week, is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. No; I frankly couldn't believe that Bob Stev-
ens, after he had been telling us he was going to cooperate with us,
after I knew that he had called Lawton, and told him to cooperate
at least to a certain extent, I couldn't conceive of Bob Stevens wanting
to break Lawton for that cooperation. It was just too contradictory.
I frankly didn't pay too much attention to it, but I did make it clear
to Mr. Adams that I knew that if they broke Lawton that the only
reason they were breaking him was because he did help us expose
people with Communist records in the radar laboratories.
Mr. Welch. And that you were not going to keep quiet if they did
break him ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't think we discussed whether I would
keep quiet or not.
Mr. Welch. Apparently you must have glared at him enough, or
something, so that on the 25th he called Stevens and said, "I think
the Senator will raise a ruckus if you fire Lawton."
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, you have seen me here for a long
time. I don't think I have glared at anyone. I was somewhat dis-
turbed. I didn't believe that the threat was too serious. I didn't
think Bob Stevens would do this. I made it very clear that if they
did, I knew the reason for it.
I don't think we raised the question of what I would say. I believe
in fairness to Mr. Adams that he could assume that if they were to
break a general because he helped us expose Communists, that I would
have discussed that; and very frankly, I would have.
Mr. Welch. Now let's go forward to the next day, because this
matter came up again, did it not?
Senator McCarthy. It came up quite often.
Mr. Welch. And it came up just as strong as ever on the 16th and
17th of December, didn't it ?
Senator McCarthy. I think the iTth was the day it came up
strongest.
Mr. Welch. That is the day on wdiich we had the ride uptown after
the luncheon at Gasner's, is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. Let me say this : On the 16th, I think for
the first time — and I may be mistaken on the dates— on the ICth, I
think for the first time Mr. Adams gave us the date that they were
going to relieve Lawton.
Mr. Welch. No. Because on the 24th and 25th, Mr. Colin said he
gave you the date as the very next day.
Shall I read that to you again ?
Senator McCarthy. You iiced not read it. I heard the testimony.
Mr. Welch. That was a very sudden and very prominent date,
wasn't it?
Senator McCarthy. I don't evaluate Mr. Cohn's testimony. He
has a much better memory, I think, than any man I know. If he says
they were going to relieve him the next day, I would abide by that.
I frankly don't recall that he said the next day. I know that on the
16th he sa'id January 1. If Mr. Cohn has testified that he said the
next day, I am sure that Mr. Cohn's memory would be good on that.
2940 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
As I say, Mr. Cohn and Mr. Adams had mucli more conversation
about this than I did.
Mr. Welch. But you remember when I started talking to you about
24-25, I read to you from page 4048 where Mr. Cohn testified that—
thoy plan to relieve General Lawton of his command the next day.
Do you remember my reading that to you, sir?
Senator McCarthy. I remember your reading it, and may I say I
know he was threatening that they would relieve Lawton. I person-
ally don't recall that he said the next day, but if Mr. Cohn said it was
the next day, I am sure that Mr. Cohn is right.
Mr. Welch. And it turns up again in Mr. Cohn's testimony which
I have read to you heretofore on page 4049, where Mr. Cohn testified
that —
Mr. Stevens had it very much on his mind and was very anxious to get rid of
General Lawton, and intended to do so, hoped to be able to do so, the next day.
Can we have it quite firmly fixed— this is the second time I have been
over it— that on November 24 and 25— on November 24, Adams is talk-
ing about kicking Lawton out the next day.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Jenkins
Mr. Welch. "Welch" is the name, sir.
Senator McCarthy. I am very sorry.
Mr. Welch, I can only tell you what I remember. I know it would
be very easy for me to say "Yes, I remember all the things that Roy
remembers." I knew they were talking about an imminent breaking
of Lawton.
As I say, much more of the conversation was with Mr. Cohn and Mr.
Adams than with me. If Roy Cohn says the threat was to remove him
the next day, I am sure that is right. The first specific date that I fix
m my mind was on the 16th of December, when I called my office and
dictated a memorandum. At that time he gave me the date January 1.
Mr. Welch. I understand that you say that, and I will come back
to that in a moment. Before we got sidetracked. Senator, I thought I
heard you say that you had been mistaken about a date or about some-
one's presence in New York, and I think I know what you wanted to
tell me. Will you now do so?
Senator McCarthy. There is nothing I want to tell you, except to
answer your question.
Mr. Welch. I thought you had in mind that you testified on direct
that on the 16th of December Mr. Carr and Mr. Cohn were not in town.
Did you have that in mind ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Carr and Mr. Cohn were in town during
the day. We held hearings over at Foley Square. Didn't we, Roy,
all day?
Yes ; we held hearings over in Foley Square during the day. They
were not there in the evening, and I called Mr. Adams several times
trying to locate Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr, and also to talk to Mr. Adams
about the Lawton matter, principally to talk about the Lawton matter.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has again expired.
Mr. Jenkins?
Mr. Jenkins. Pass.
Senator Mundt. I pass. Senator McClellan and Senators to my
left? Senators to my right? Mr. Cohn?
Back to you, Mr. Welch, for another 10 minutes.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2941
Mr. Welch. Now, Mr. Ad — strike it out.
Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Hadn't you passed, Mr. Cohn?
Mr. CoHN. I might want to ask 1 or 2 clarifying questions.
Mr. Welch. I am sorry.
Senator Mundt. I am sorry. It is my fault.
Senator McCarthy. One moment. Let's see if I can dissaude my
counsel from cross-examining me.
(Senator McCarthy and Mr. Cohn conferring.)
Mr. CoHN. I will pass, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Thank you.
Mr. Welch, 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Senator, I think you were mistaken about a date or
about someone's being in New York, but that, in my book, is not a crime.
I do want to read to you from the bottom of page 6170 of the record.
Senator McCarthy. Will you wait 1 minute again ?
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Time back in.
Mr. Welch. Have you it in front of you ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. The last paragraph on the page, you say — this is you
testifying :
Now, you asked me about the 17th. On the 17th I may have discussed that in
the morning at Foley Square. I did it almost every day. But the conversation
you have reference to is the conversation over at Gasner's Restauraut, I believe.
Senai:or McCartpiy. That is right.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
That was about the breaking of General Lawton.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
The day before that —
and I am interpolating, that would be the 16th
The day before that, Mr, Adams brought that matter up. Mr. Cohn and Mr.
Carr were not in town.
That you would like to correct, would you not ?
Senator McCarthy. I would not like to correct that. Mr. Cohn
and Mr. Carr were not in town in the evening. They left sometime
late in the afternoon. We were holding hearings in the courthouse at
Foley Square.
Mr. Welch. Incidentally, I don't call it a crime to make a little
mistake of this sort.
Senator McCarthy. I don't think it is a mistake.
Mr. Welch. Adams himself was not in New York on the 16th, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Yes he was in New York on the 16th.
Mr. Welch. In any event, Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr
Senator McCarthy. In fact, Mr. Adams attended the hearings, as I
recall, on the 16th.
Mr. Welch. In any event, Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr were in New
York on the 16th throughout the day ?
Senator McCarthy. Not throughout the day.
Mr. Welch. Well, until the hearings adjourned?
Senator McCarthy. No. They left some time in the afternoon.
2942 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. They were at the hearings the next morning?
Senator McCarthy. They were there the next morning.
Mr. Welch. Have you handy, the record of the hearings on the IGth,
Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I have not. I am sure we could get them.
Mr. Welch. I have them here.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch has a copy.
Mr. Welch. I assure you, you will have a chance to check my ac-
curacy against the record, so I will read it carefully. I am reading
from the Senate Resolution 40, part 6. It is headed "S. Res. 40,"
much more familiar to you, "Part 6."
On page 237, it says :
Wednesday, December 16, 1953, Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of
the Committee on Government Operations —
and among those present are the following:
Present also —
is the phrase —
Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel ; Francis P. Carr, executive director ; and Daniel G.
Bucldey, executive counsel.
Does that refresh your recollection as to their having been there?
Senator McCarthy. I told you they had been there until some time
in the afternoon. Mr. Adams was there also. I don't recall what
time John came in. I think he came in sometime in the afternoon. I
know he stayed after Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr left.
Mr. Welch. Well, I am more interested, at the moment, in Mr. Cohn
and Mr. Carr. At page 281 of the same document, it says here :
Whereupon, at 4 : 15 p. m., the committee recessed until the following day,
Thursday, December 17, 1953, at 10 : 30 a. m.
So Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr were with you until 4:15 p. m., were
they not ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't think so. Could I see whether that is
executive session or public session? As I recall, we had an executive
session after that public session. We normally didn't quit work at
4:15.
Mr. Welch. If you will look at page 280, in case it gets lost as I
flip it over, you will see what I am talking about, and when you finish,
I would like to have it back. [Document handed.]
Senator McCarthy. You may, sir.
May I, JNIr W^lch, call your attention to something which you ob-
viously missed here ? I say :
We will now go into executive session. For the benefit of the members of the
press, there will be no press conference or anything after the executive session.
We will run rather late. We have a great number of witnesses to hear. If I
may, I will ask now that the room be cleared so that we can go into executive
session. The public session will resimie at 10:30 tomorrow morning.
So the 4 : 15 recess was a recess of the public session. We then went
into executive session and we stayed in executive session, as I recall,
quite a long time. .
Mr. Welcil And were Mr. Cohn and T\Ir. Carr with you?
Senator McCarthy. JNIr. Welch, 1 have asked Mr. Carr and Mr.
Cohn, and they tell me they think they were there at the beginning
of the executive session, but left shortly after it bagan.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2943
Mr. Welch. Well, that might well be. In that event, they were
there as late as 4 : 15, which is the time at which the public session
ended ?
Senator McCarty. That would be correct.
Mr. Welch. And for some little period, at least, thereafter, while
the executive session began ?
Senator McCarthy. That is their recollection. I thought they had
left before that.
Mr. Welch. Their recallection is satisfactory to me, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Perfectly satisfactory to me, too.
Mr. Welch. I take it you would not be apt to be running an
executive session without one or the other with you. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. Oh, yes.
Mr. Welch. Is it your recollection that they both left sometime
after 4: 15?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr.WELcii. Now, at some time on that day, as I understand your
testimony, you dictated over the telephone the memorandum that
became No. 6 in the printed document from which we have worked
here, is that right?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. Welch. At what time did you dictate that, at what time of day ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I would have no idea. I call
my office constantly, and I keep no diary. I would have no idea
what time of the day.
Mr. Welch. Well, I assume — strike that out. When you were out
of town, how late is Mrs. Driscoll in your office ?
Senator McCarthy. Sometimes 6 o'clock, sometimes 7, sometimes 8,
Sometimes 9. Mary works very, very long, unusual hours. I often
call at 9, or 9 : 30 at night and find her.
Mr. Welch. It could be that my secretary is listening to me. My
observation is that when I am out of town she is fairly apt to go home
about the time business ends. Is that inaccurate as to Mrs. Driscoll ?
Senator McCarthy. Mary Driscoll w'orks until she cleans up all
the work that she thinks must be cleaned up for that day.
Mr. Welch. Can you not help me at all as to the probable time of
day when you dictated this memorandum. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. No. If I were to guess. It would be purely
a guess, Mr. Welch. I would guess it was during the time when I
had something to eat in the evening. That might be 6: 30; it might
be 7 o'clock. I don't even know whether we had an evening session
that night. I seems to me — no, I don't think we did. So that it
perhaps was around 6 or 6 : 30.
Mr. Welch. Do you know what became of this memorandum after
you dictated it ? Was it sent to New York ?
Senator McCarthy. I might say, if the time is important, we can
check with the telephone company. I am sure they would be able to
give us the exact time of the call.
Mr. Welch. Well, we may have some reference to help you. I
don't think time is enormously important. I assume this was dic-
tated around not later than, say, 6 or 7 o'clock.
Senator McCarthy. Pardon me just one moment.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
46620°— 54— pt. 71 i
2944 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. Would that be a fair assumption?
Senator Mundt. Time back.
Senator McCarthy. I am very sorry, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. This may be corrected if the telephone calls help you.
Would it be a fair assumption that it was probably dictated by 6 or 7
o'clock ?
Senator McCarthy. As I say, it would be purely a guess. I don't
remember what time. It would be after the executive session. Most
likely around 6, 6 : 30, or 7. It might have been later. It might have
been 8 or it might have been 9. We can get the phone slip on that.
Mr. Welch. Perhaps we can.
Now, Senator, can you tell us whether or not — and the record seems
io me ambiguous on the point, but I think you will know — was the
memorandum sent up to New York so you would have it as a matter
to discuss the next day
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Welch. Or kept in Washington?
Senator McCarthy. It was not sent up to New York. In fact, I
doubt very much that this memorandum was ever seen by Mr. Carr or
Mr. Colin, because the next noon we had such a very extensive discus-
sion about tliis it would have been a waste of time to have shown them
this memorandum. The reason it was dictated was because I was
leaving town the next day and I wanted this brought to their atten-
tion.
Mr. Welch. Incidentally, as to your leaving town the next day, that
is the day that appears on the memorandum, because it wasn't tran-
scribed the night you telephoned it in.
Senator McCarthy. Apparently
Mr. Welch. Where did you go the next day. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. I spoke in Chicago, I believe. I believe it was
Chicago. I don't know.
Mr. Welch. And at what time did you leave — I think you went
to the Waldorf, did you not, as you came uptown with Mr. Cohn, Mr.
Carr, and Mr. Adams?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Mr. Welch. Do you recall, sir, what time you left the hotel to go
to a plane?
Senator McCarthy. I caught a plane some time around 4 o'clock,
but again I wouldn't be able to give you the exact time.
Mr. Welch. Thank you.
Now, would you look at the memorandum. Senator
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Go ahead, Mr. Welch, time in.
Mr. Welch. Would you look at the memorandum now, which is
No. 6, and dated December 17, Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. The opening phrase of it is as follows :
In talkins to John Adams today, I learned that General Lawton who, as you
ri'iall, cooperated fully with the committee in the exposure of subversives at Fort
Monmouth, is about to be relieved of his command.
Senator McCarthy. Relieved.
Mr. Welch. Let me read that first clause again :
In talking to John Adams today.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2945
Senator, you have told us that you knew that on November 24 and 25.
Senator McCarthy. I told you that subject was brought up, but I
couldn't believe it then.
Mr. Welch. And that Adams then said they were going to kick
him out the next day.
Senal or McCarthy. I didn't so testify.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Cohn did.
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. And you believe Mr. Cohn's testimony ?
Senator McCarthy. I believe Mr. Cohn's testimony.
Mr, Welch. And you had a conversation with Adams about it on
November 24, the night of the 24th ?
Senator McCarthy. I did.
Mr. Welch. Which resulted in a telephone conversation in your
presence on the 25th ? Is that right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. I had a conversation with Mr. Adams, right.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has expired. Have you
finished your answer?
Mr. Jenkins passes, the Chair passes.
Any Senators to my left ?
To my right?
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add one thing
for clarification. Senator McCarthy, when a committee convenes, it is
customary for the official reporter to note the presence of every mem-
ber and every staff member who is present; is that correct?
Senator McCarthy. I am sorry, I was reading a note that some-
body passed to me.
Senator Dirksen. I say when a committee session convenes, it is
customary for the official reporter to note the presence of every mem-
ber and every staff member who may be present ?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Senator Dirksen. If and when a member or a staff member should
leave the meeting at any time, that fact is not actually noted on the
record ?
Senator McCarthy. Can I tell you why I missed your first ques-
tion ? I just got a note here from someone saying that Mary should
hit me for a raise at this particular moment, after I testified about her
long hours.
Senator Dirksen. I just want to be sure that there was a clear
concept.
Senator McCarthy. The record normally shows who is there at
the beginning of the hearing. However, if a Senator leaves or some-
one leaves during the hearing, or if someone comes in during the hear-
ing, normally the official reporter does not write that down. I believe
that is right.
Senator Dirksen. So what is noted at the beginning of the hearing,
the printed report of a hearing, would not be conclusive at all that
those same people were present when the hearing adjourned?
Senator McCarthy. No, sir.
Senator Dirksen. I just wanted to make sure that fact was clear.
Senator McCarthy. In fact, it would have no meaning at all.
Senator Dirksen. That is all.
Senator Mundt. Any other questions ? Mr. Cohn ?
2946 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. CoiiN. I am sorely tempted to ask a few questions to clear up
this whole matter so we can move on to something else.
Senator Mundt. If you can resist the temptation, it will be all right
with the Chair.
Mr. Welch?
Mr. CoHN. All right. I will resist it.
Mr. Welch. Senator, I will read the second sentence of that docu-
ment :
I questioned Adams very closely on this in a friendly manner and I find that
the only reason he could give us is tliat Lawtou embarrassed the military by
helping to make it possible for us to expose the incredibly bad security setup
vphich has existed at Fort Monmouth.
Senator, Adams had told you that on the night of November 24?
Senator McCarthy. No, Adams had never admitted that. He
hasn't admitted it up to this day. This is a resmne of what I got
from my questioning of Adams.
Mr. Welch. But on the night of November 24, you asked him
why they were going to do it?
Senator McCarthy. I did.
Mr. Welctl And he told you ?
Senator McCarthy. He told me what he also told me on the 16th.
Mr. Welch. But he also told you on the 24th ?
Senator McCarthy. Wait until I finish, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. I would like to know what he told you on the nio-ht
of the 24th.
Senator McCarthy. I will tell you.
Mr. Welch. Please do, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Now can I answer?
Mr. Welch. Indeed you may.
Senator JMcCarthy. Thank you.
On the 24th and on the 16th, Jolm tried to follow the fiction that
they were breakin<y this general because he had mentioned at a staff
meeting that certain of those— rather, that a majority of those whom
we had exposed because of Communist connections were from certain
colleges and universities. It was conversation.
Mr. Adams knew and I knew that tlie only reason they were break-
ing Lawton was because of his cooperation with the committee. There
is no question about that.
Mr. Welch. Where were you with Adams when you questioned him
closely, as you say you did, on December 16 ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't remember the room number.
It was in the courthouse at Foley Square in New York.
Mr. Welch. Who was there?
Senator MCarthy. Mr. Adams and I were there. I don't think
(here was anyone else present.
Mr. Welch. Neither Mr. Cohn nor ]\fr. Carr?
Senator MCarthy. That is the evening Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr
had left.
Mv. Welch. Now, isn't it a fact, Senator, tliat it is (rue that you
learned this wliole story on November 24 and 25 ?
Senator McCarthy.' I had heard the threat made by Mr. Adams
on November 24.
Mr. Welcil Including tlie reasons as to why they were going to do
it and including among (hose some that you thought were false?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2947
Senator McCarthy. That is right, but at the time, as I said, I
didn't believe that they would — let me finish— that they would follow
through with the bluff.
On December 16, I was more firmly convinced that perhaps they
were going to go through with it. On the 17th, I may say I was
rather firmly convinced.
Mr. Welch. Yes, but you dictated this memorandum to Wash-
ington on the night of the 16th.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. Welch. And it wasn't strictly accurate when you said
Senator McCarthy. Yes, it is.
Mr. Welch. When vou said :
In talking to John Adams today I lonrnod that Gonernl Lawton who as you
recall cooperated fully wth the committee in the exiiusure of subvei'sivea at Fort
Monmouth, is about to be relieved of his command.
Senator McCarthy. That is accurate.
Mr. Welch. If it were entirely accurate it would say :
In talking to John Adams today I learned for the second time —
is that notcorrect ?
Senator McCarthy. It is accurate, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Wouldn't it be correct to say "I learned for the second
time"?
Senator McCarthy. I think this is
Mr. Welch. Can anything be clearer, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. I think this is a completely accurate resume
of the testimony. May I say, Mr. Welch, that the other day — I think
this is a good analogy to this — the other day I heard a man who was
being importuned to run for the Congress hold a press conference.
For half an hour he said, "I am not going to run. I will not run."
He gave all the good reasons in the world. When he got through a
new man walked up to one of the men who was present and said "What*
did he say ?" And he said, "He said 'Yes.' "
That was a correct resume of the news conference.
I think this is a very accurate resume of information I got from IVIr.
Adams.
Mr. Welch. Isn't it a fact. Senator, that on November 24 you
learned that General Lawton was about to be relieved of his com-
mand?
Senator McCarthy. On November 24 Mr, Adams made threats that
they would relieve him of his command.
Mr. Welch. That is right, and that is all he was doing on the 16th,
isn't it?
Senator McCarthy. On the 24th I didn't believe that they could do
this.
Mr. Welch. And you didn't
Senator McCarthy. By the 16th when you brought it up again and
gave me the definite date of January 1, while I still wasn't fully con-
vinced, I was impressed that they might go through with this.
Mr. Welch. And you didn't make a memorandum of it when he told
you the first time, did you, to wit, on November 24 ?
Senator McCarthy. No, because Mr. Cohn — let me finish — Mr.
Cohn was present at that time so I wouldn't make a memorandum to
Mr. Cohn.
2948 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr, Welch. May I have that answer read ?
Senator McCarthy. You asked me if I made a memorandum on the
24th.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, the Chair has been advised that there is
a rollcall vote. The members present will have to get over there so
we will have this rollcall double in brass for our afternoon recess. We
will reconvene in about 10 minutes.
(Brief recess.)
Senator Mundt. The committee will come to order. We have a bi-
partisan representation. May the Chair remind the audience, and I
assume most of you were here with us before the recess, around this
final stage of the hearings we are especially hopeful that the audiences
will maintain the splendid cooperation which has in the main been
accorded this committee up to now. I ask the uniformed Capitol
Police members and the plainclothes people in the audience to enforce
the rule vigorously to the end of the hearing, to remove immediately,
politely but firmly, from the room anybody who violates the conditions
upon which he came,
Mr. Welch, the timekeeper advises me you had 6 minutes left of
your time before the rollcall. You may proceed at this time.
Mr. Welch. Senator, I was inquiring about memorandum No. 6,
the one of December 17, 1953. May I now attract your attention to
the last two lines of the memorandum :
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.
Did you contemplate that Mr. Carr might be seeing Secretary
Stevens before you did?
Senator McCarthy. The memorandum would seem to so indicate.
_Mr. Welch. Were you also contemplating that Mr. Cohn might see
him before you did ?
Senator McCarthy. This memorandum would seem to so indicate.
Mr. Welch. Was that what you were contemplating, that Mr. Carr
would actually be seeing the Secretary of the Army before you did,
Senator?
Senator McCarthy. When I say, "If either of you talk to Bob
Stevens before I do, I suggest you bring these facts to his attention,"
that is exactly what I meant.
Mr. Welch. In that he may not be aware of this situation ?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. What was there about Lawton that Mr. Stevens was
not aware of ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know.
Mr. AVelch. You certainly can't suggest anything about Lawton
that Stevens didn't know; can you?
Senator McCarthy. I still have difficulty believing that Bob
Stevens would try to break a man, whom he has described as a great
genera], because he worked with our committee. I think it is a mat-
ter—at that time I felt it should be taken up with Bob Stevens.
Mr. Welch. My difficulty is is quite different, sir, from yours.
Senator McCarthy. I know it is.
Mr. Wrlcut. I can't see what there was about the Lawton situation
of which Stevens could possibly have been unaware. Can you?
Senator McC^arth y. Mr. Welch, one day you criticize me for having
not brought matters to Bob Stevens' attention. Today you criticize
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2949
me for bringing them to his attention. I felt that this should be
brought to his attention.
Mr. Welch. What should be brought to his attention ?
Senator McCarthy. The Lawton situation.
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, he is the moving party in the Law-
ton situation. He is stirring up the trouble and you were the guy
that learns about the situation ; aren't you ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't agree that Mr. Stevens is the moving
party in any of this. I think that someone else was.
Mr. Welch. Do you mean to suggest, Senator, that your boys,
Cohn and Carr, or either of them, were supposed to tell Secretary
Stevens something about the Lawton situation of which he was
unaware?
Senator McCarthy. First let me correct a part of your question.
You said "your boys, Carr and Cohn."
Mr. Welch. Strike it out and let me say, "your men, Carr and
Cohn."
Senator McCarthy. Let me say that Carr and Cohn are more men
than any two men I hav^^ been in contact with for a long time.
Mr. Welch. I had them grow up before you said much. Let's call
them men. What is it that those two men — —
Senator McCarthy. Let's do that from now on.
What was your question?
Mr. Welch. Don't you know. Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. What was your question ?
Mr. Welch. My question is, What was there that Mr. Cohn and
Mr. Carr could convey to Secretary Stevens as a result of your dictat-
ing this memorandum that Secretary Stevens didn't know three times
over ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, it is very clear that I was suggest-
ing they convey to Mr. Stevens the information in this memorandum.
That is'^what I was suggesting.
Mr. Welch. Would you like to let your answer rest there?
Senator McCarthy. 'That is my answer.
Mr. Welch. Now, as I understand it, you never saw this memo-
randum again until when?
Senator McCarthy. I think the nest time I saw this, Mr. Welch,
was when I asked Mrs. Driscoll to get from my files any memoranda
having to do with the Schine-Cohn-Carr-McCarthy matter.
Mr. Welch. Did you know, Senator, that she was maintainmg that
little file that was put in evidence here?
Senator McCarthy. I know that Mary files things that she con-
siders important.
Mr. Welch. I understand she files things. Did you know that she
was maintaining that little file that was put into evidence when she
cajne up to testify?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know what you mean by the little file.
M". Welch. You know what I mean, don't you?
Senator McCarthy. I assume that she was keeping these memo-
randa in the files. . , m,
Mj. Welch. Did you know that she had that little file all put
together until you started looking for it in March?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, I told you that I knew that Mary
Driscoll, being an efficient secretary, was saving any memoranda that
appeared to be of any importance. Now— strike that.
2950 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
]\Ir. Welch. My question is, Senator, did you know she had them
all neatly assembled in one file ?
Senator McCarthy. I would say that anything she does is neatly
done.
Mr. Welch. Did you know she had them all neatly assembled?
Senator McCarthy. I didn't know whether they were assembled or
not.
]\Ir. Welch. Was it a good and a glad surprise to you when you
found them all put together ?
Senator McCarthy. I knew that Mrs. Driscoll would have the
memoranda. I asked her for them. She gave them to me, period.
There was nothing especially glad about knowing what I have known
for years, that I have got an extremely competent secretary.
Mr. Welch. Did you first send Frank Carr searching through the
files for memoranda, as this, of March 11 ?
Senator McCarthy. I believe I told Frank to check the files and I
think he, as he has testified, passed that job on to Mrs. Driscoll, know-
ing that she had the files.
Mr. Welch. Was he the one that had the glad surprise of finding
the files in Mrs. Driscoll's possession all put together, or were you the
one?
Senator McCarthy. The what surprise ?
Mr. Welch. The glad surprise.
Senator McCarthy. I wasn't surprised.
Mr. Welch. Was he the one that found it or were you ?
Senator McCarthy. Mrs. Driscoll got the material out of the files.
Mr. Welch. And gave it to whom first ?
Senator McCarthy. Me.
Mr. Welch. To you first.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch's time has expired. Any questions?
The Chair will pass.
Senators to the left ?
Any Senators to the right ?
Mr. Cohn? Pass?
Mr. CopiN. I pass.
Senator ]\Iundt. Mr. Welch, another 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. I will ask INIr. St. Clair to finish the item he had in
hand quite shortly and then I will come back.
Senator Mundt. Mr. St. Clair.
Mr. St. Clair. Senator, you and I were discussing quite early this
morning the alleged blackmail attempt of December or January 22.
My memory is, sir, that I had asked you whether or not it was not
true that the substance of the matter that John Adams was supposed
to have blackmailed you with or tried to blackmail you with had
already become a matter of public knowledge in the newspaper? Do
you recall that ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know how much of that was in the
newspapers, Mr. St. Clair. I know that there were some so-called
leaked stories that appeared, but what they were, I frankly don't know,
except that I think someone called my attention to a column which I
referred to the other day, along in December.
Mr. St. Clair. That is right, on December 22, the day you wrote
the letter to the Secretary.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 2951
Mr. St. Clair. I believe you intimated that one reason you wrote
the letter was because you had seen that in the newspaper on that
very morning, as you put it.
Senator McCarthy. I don't think it was that column alone. I
believe there had been other so-called dope stories and leaked stories.
Mr. St. Clair. That is correct. In addition to that, Senator, not
only had it been in the newspapers, but at least four Senators knew
about it ; didn't they ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know how many Senators knew
about it.
Mr. St. Clair. You know that John Adams had been to see Senator
Dirksen?
Senator McCarthy. No ; I didn't know that Mr. Adams had been to
see Senator Dirksen.
Mr. St. Clair. You received a call, according to Frank Carr, the
night that this supposed blackmail attempt was made, to that effect,
didn't you ?
Senator McCarthy. I received a call to the effect that Mr. Adams
had either phoned Mr. Dirksen or had seen him or something. I for-
get which it was.
Mr. St. Clair. All right. So here is a man trying to blackmail you
with information that Drew Pearson had in his column, that other
newspapers had talked about, and with all respect to the United States
Senate, four Senators knew about it. It was hardly a secret ; was it?
Senator McCarthy. He didn't succeed.
Mr. St. Clair. My question was. It was hardly a secret; was it?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. St. Clair, I think that you make a good
Eoint there. I think that Mr. Adams had discussed this with a num-
er of newsmen prior to the time he discussed it with me. I didn't
realize the extent of that. For example, when Mr. Adams saw me, he
didn't tell me that he had had a meeting with Bill Rogers and
Brownell and certain other individuals. So much of this that you and
I know now, I didn't know at that time.
Mr. St. Clair. No, but you knew Drew Pearson had written about it.
Senator McCarthy. I knew that he had written about it. He
didn't have all of the material that was finally produced.
May I say Mr. St. Clair, that
Mr. St. Clair. I guess you may, but it won't be responsive to a
question.
Senator McCarthy. Even up to the time Mr. Adams talked to me
on the night of the 22d, there was no intimation that they were going
to try to smear Frank Carr. Roy Cohn was the target then. Frank
was brought in later by someone else.
Mr. St. Clair. The blackmail that you testified to was Roy Cohn,
though ?
Senator McCarthy. The blackmail was the threat to
Mr. St. Clair. Roy Cohn?
Senator McCarthy. To issue a report claiming that Roy had used
improper methods to get this private promoted to be a private.
Mr. St. Clair. So as it sums up, here was an attempted blackmail,
sir, that was in the newspapers, and four Senators already knew about
it, and at least you knew about Senator Dirksen's knowledge that very
night, because Frank Carr called you and told you. Isn't that right?
4G620°— 54— pt. 71 5
2952 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCartht. I don't believe all of this information appeared
in the papers until the report was finally issued.
Mr. St. Clair. It was such a serious matter, sir, that you gave John
Adams some gifts as he left your home that night; wasn't it?
^ Senator McCarthy. Mrs. McCarthy gave Mr. Adams, as I say, some
South Dakota sausage and some cheese from my friend, Steve Miller,
at Marshfield, Wis.
Mr. St. Clair. I hate very much to bring your wife into it. I would
infer, sir, that that met with your aproval on that evening?
Senator McCarthy. Anything that my wife has done so far, espe-
cially in view of the fact that she is here listening to me now, meets
witli my hearty approval.
Mr. St. Clair. I knew you would say that, sir. So in all honesty,
Senator, you don't give gilts to persons who come around and attempt
to blackmail you; do j'ou.
Senator McCarthy. Mister
Mr. St. Clair. Oh, just answer.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. St. Clair, we gave Mr. Adams some—
Jeannie did
Mr. St. Clair. Some cheese and some sausage ; isn't that right ?
Senator McCarthy. One thing we people in Wisconsin do
Mr. St. Clair. To blackmailers, sir?
Senator McCarthy. No, Mr. St. Clair. That may sound rather
clever at this moment.
Mr. St. Clair. It is a little astonishing to me, but go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. But the point is that John Adams had been
trying to induce us to call off these hearings for some time. He felt
that was his job. I felt he was going much too far when he made
these threats about issuing a report about Roy. I didn't think that
night he would do it. I just couldn't conceive of his doing it.
Of course, as I say, there was much that happened prior to that
time that I didn't know then that I know now. I didn't know, for
example, that — strike that.
Mr. St. Clair. Do you mean he was kidding, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. No; I didn't think he was kidding.
Mr. St. Clair. Do you want to let it stand that this man attempted
to blackmail you on that night?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. St. Clair, you may be able to interrupt
some witnesses, but I am trying to keep these answers short
Mr. St. Clair. I am going to try to help you.
Senator McCarthy. I am going to insist on answering your ques-
tion. Is that O.K. ? t, J 1
Mr. St. Clair. You have every right to answer my question.
Senator McCarthy. I said I didn't think he was kidding. I felt
John was doing everything he could to induce us to call off the
hearings.
Mr. St. Clair. Including— I am sorry, sir.
Senator McCarthy. Go ahead.
^ Mr St. Clair. Including attempting to blackmail you ; is that
right ?
^ Senator ^IcCarthy. I would consider that blackmail, the threat to
issue the type of scurrilous report, fraudulent, completely unfounded,
'^fith no basis m fact, against Mr. Carr and Mr. Cohn.
Mr. St. Clair, I think we should remember in these closing minutes—
1 hope they are the closing minutes •
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2953
Mr. St. Clair. Is this responsive?
_ Senator McCarthy. That the only charge of misconduct made by
either Mr. Stevens or Mr. Adams on the stand under oath was that my
chief counsel here was unable to induce me to desist from calling
the members of the old Truman loyalty board who had been sending
Communists back to secret radar plants. Roy never tried to do that.
If he had, he would not have been successful.
Mr. St. Clair. I must have a rather poor memory, Senator. I
happen to recall some testimony that Eoy made some threats, but you
and I are not now going to argue this case. I don't think it is ap-
propriate for any man to make any threat. I think it is highly
iinappropriate for the chief counsel of this subcommittee to make
threats.
Senator McCarthy. Wait, Mr. St. Clair.
Mr. St. Clair. Shall we pass on? I haven't asked you about that.
Senator McCarthy. No. When you talk about my chief counsel,
just as you said, there is talk about his making threats. There was a
great deal of discussion about what Roy said when he was invited
down to go through the radar laboratories at Fort Monmouth. When
he got there he was excluded. There is testimony that he Was thor-
oughly irritated. I think he was. I think that I would have been
much, much more irritated if I had been in Roy Cohn's position that
day.
Mr. St. Clair. There is also. Senator, some testimony about a cer-
tain automobile ride; isn't that right?
Senator McCarthy. Yes ; I have testified about that.
Mr. St. Clair. And so has John Adams ?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. St. Clair. And this committee, and not you, sir, is to decide who
is telling the truth.
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. St. Clair. Thank you.
As I understand it, this was such a scurrilous mark against the name
of Roy Cohn that on this same night you left Mr. Adams giving him
gifts ? Is that the way you want to leave it ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Adams had not issued the report up to
that point.
Mr. St. Clair. But he had threatened to, you say ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, he very strongly indicated and let me
know that if we continued with the hearings he would issue a report.
1 didn't believe that he would at that time because I had listened to
John's talk off and on for quite some time.
Mr. St. Clair. Then it is of no consequence if you didn't believe it.
Senator McCarthy. I didn't believe anyone could be so dishonest
as to issue tha false, completely fraudulent charges.
Senator Mundt. Mr. St. Clair's time has expired.
Any questions to my right ?
To my left?
Mr. Cohn?
Mr. Cohn. Just one second, Senator Mundt.
(Senator McCarthy conferred with Mr. Cohn.)
Mr. Cohn. Two very short questions.
2954 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy, I have lost an argument.
Mr. CoHN. On the question of the Wisconsin cheese and the South
Dakota sausage, Senator, as I understand it, when Mrs. McCarthy
went in and got those things for John Adams, you did not say to her,
"Don't give them to him, I didn't like some of the things he said to me
tonight," is that right?
Senator McCarthy. No, I had no objection to what Jeannie did.
Mr. CoHX. And the second point is this : There is a difference be-
tween leaking a sentence or two or something to a columnist, and
issuing a long list of charges under the name of the Department of the
Army Avhich ended up in blazing headlines on every front page in the
country, is there not ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, and, Mr. Cohn, may I say in fairness to
John Adams, I think it has been testified to here that he said at one
time that these are things that are beyond his control. I don't think
that John Adams would have issued these false charges on his own.
At this point, I don't know who is responsible. I don't think it was
John.
Mr. Cohn. Nothing further, sir.
Senator Muxdt. Mr. Welch, or Mr. St. Clair, you have another 10
minutes.
Mr. St. Clair. I have just a few more questions. I take it you will
agree to this extent, that John Adams never directly said that he was
going to issue those charges, is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. He never said in so many words, '"I will issue
charges against Roy Cohn," but the conversation made it clear that he
was making the threat.
Mr. St. Clair. As you interpreted it ?
Senator McCarthy. Right. In fact, so much so, that I referred—
in fact, I think I used the term, at least half dozen times that night,
the term "blackmail." I pointed out to Mr. Adams that while he felt,
he apparently honestly felt, it was a mistake for us to continue our
investigation of the few Communists in the Army, that every other
department would feel the same way, and I discussed with him the
fact — in some detail — the fact that I had gone out and campaigned
against men like Tydings, men like Benton, because I felt that they
were placing party above country, and that I thought no one had
a right to do any whitewashing. And I told him that while it might
might temporarily hurt, in the end it was wise for everyone if we
would develop all the facts.
I discussed with him, as I recall, the Government Printing Office
case. I pointed out that there we found a bad situation, that the new
head, Mr, Blattenberger, gave us complete cooperation. When he
found that the loyalty board had not been doing its job as it should
they were apparently removed, and he removed all the fifth amend-
ment Communists. And I suggested to Mr. Adams that is what he
and Mr. Stevens should do. He had a different view of the situation.
Mr. St. Clair. Let me ask you this. Senator, were you trying to
accomplish something yourself at this meeting?
Senator :McCarthy. I was trying to induce Mr. Adams to work
with us so
Mr. St. Clair. And let you call the loyalty board ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2955
Senator McCarthy. So that we could let the American people see
the faces and the names of those individuals who had been responsible
for what I, Mr. St. Clair, have called treason.
Mr. St. Clair. And that is why you invited John Adams to your
home that night, to see if you could convince him that you should be
allowed to have the loyalty board before your committee, is that
right ?
Senator McCarthy. That may have been one of the reasons. I
was
Mr. St. Clair. Well, that was the principal reason ?
Senator McCarthy. I was also disturbed about the fact that he
had been giving what I considered false statements to some of the
Senators in regard to Mr. Cohn.
Mr. St. Clair. I thought you didn't know about those. Senator
McCarthy. , -, ■,
Senator McCarthy. I didn't know that Mr. Adams had done it.
Mr. St. Clair. You said he had been giving, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Let me finish, now, Mr. St. Clair. I told you
I didn't know that. I believe that Mr. Adams must have been the
individual. And I think the Senators sitting here will know that
none of them told me that it was John Adams who gave them that
particular story, as far as I know. That is the best of my recollection.
I felt it was John.
Mr. St. Clair. You knew it was. Senator.
Senator McCarthy. I thought it was. I didn't know it was.
Mr. St. Clair. In any event, one thing you wanted to accomplish
on this evening was to see if you could work out some understanding
on the loyalty board problem ?
Senator McCarthy. No, what I wanted to do, Mr. St. Clair
Mr. St. Clair. Maybe just "Yes" and "No." It is getting late,
Senator.
Senator McCarthy. I know it is getting late. But not too l-ate to
get at the facts. But what I wanted to do, Mr. St. Clair, was to
work out a situation in A\hich we could get the information which
the American people should have about Communist infiltration.
Mr. St. Clair. And I believe
Senator McCarthy. And not protect those members of the loyalty
board.
Mr. St. Clair. And I believe you testified that one thing you agreed
on was to wait until the Secretary returned from the Far East ?
Senator McCarthy. I think we did. I think we did.
Mr. St. Clair. The Secretary returned on or about February 3, do
you recall that ?
Senator McCarthy. About February 3. -r- , «
Mr. St. Clair. And, as a matter of fact, Senator, from February 3
until this very day, you have not called the loyalty board, have you?
Senator McCarthy. I have not. . -, p . ^
Mr. St. Clair. And there was a considerable period of time, Senator,
between February 3 and March the 10th or 11th when this present
unpleasantness came along, in which you could have done that? ^
Senator McCarthy. No. I left on a Lincoln Day speaking tour m
which I discussed the activities of some of my Democrat friends,
very shortly after the 3d of February, I think it was the 4th or 5th.
I was sone for— I don't recall— I think 10 or 12 days. I came back.
to
2956 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
We went into the Peress Ccise. And it was during the Peress case
that things blew up.
Mr. St. Clair. Peress was before your committee on the 1st or 2d
of February, wasn't he ?
Senator McCarthy. He was before our committee on the 30th of
January, but General Z wicker was before the committee— do you
recall ? Mr. Cohn reminds me that Peress was not before the com-
mittee in open session until February 18. He was before the com-
mitte in executive session on January 30.
Mr. St. Clair. I see.
Senator McCarthy. And Zwicker was before us right after Peress.
Mr. St. Clair. So you had from February 18, then, March 10, to
call the loyalty board?
Senator McCarthy. I think that is a correct statement.
Mr. St. Clair. You have already testified, sir, that if there was any
blackmail, it certainly was not effective?
Senator McCarthy. It was not effective.
Mr. St. Clair. The reason, then, why you didn't call the loyalty
board must be some other reason, is that right?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. St. Clair. Well, it wasn't the blackmail, you say.
Senator INIcCarthy. We came back and went into the Peress case.
We felt that that should take precedence over the calling of the
loyalty board. It was during the Peress case that Mr. Stevens called—
what was the date, the 20th of February— the 20th of February, and
from that time onward, our committee "has been completely immobil-
ized. I couldn't possibly call the loyalty board.
May I say, Mr. St. Clair, so there is no doubt on the part of anyone,
1 am going to attempt to call the members of that loyalty board, when
we get through wath this hearing.
I hope the committee Avill go along with me on that. I think the
American people should know why that board of 30 individuals,
and keep in mind that all 30 didn't sit in every case, they just picked
out at random 3 or 5 to sit in each case, I think the American people
should know why, over the past number of years, the members of that
board consistenly sent men back to the radar laboratories, our top
secret radar laboratories, even after the First Army Loyalty Board
had found them unfit on grounds of loyalty and security.
I hope the_ committee votes with me oii that. If they do, we will
test out our right to give the American people the facts.
Mr. St. Clair. All I am trying to develop, Senator, is your testi-
mony that the attempted blackmail was not effective. Is that right?
Senator McCarthy. The attempted blackmail was not effective,
but the issuance of the report effectively called off our investigation
and exposure of Communists.
^ Mr. St. Clair. But it wasn't issued until the 10th of March, was it,
Senator?
Senator McCarthy. The 10th or 11th. I believe the 11th.
Mr. St. Clair. You recall John Adams testified that you said on the
22d of January that Roy Cohn had so involved himself in this matter
that you could no longer go forward ?
Senator McCarthy. That is incorrect.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2957
Mr. St. Clair. Well, it so happens you did not go forward, did yon,
Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes ; I did.
Mr. St. Clair. Well, when did you go forward on the loyalty board,
Senator ?
Senator McCarthy. I have never had the loyalty board before me.
1 had Mr. Adams before me. I ordered him to produce the loyalty
board. He
Mr. St. Clair. That was before the 22d?
Senator McCarthy. He refused to do that. As I recall, I agreed
to wait until Bob Stevens got back. I thought that maybe Mr.
Stevens would agree with us on the matter. The first conversation
I had with Mr. Stevens after he got back was when he called me, in
that monitored phone conversation which you have here. And from
that time onward, it was impossible to do anything. Our committee
has been immobilized.
Mr. St. Clair. The very day before the report of March 10 was
issued, you sent over 6 names of servicemen who you felt were Com-
munists, did you not ?
Senator McCarthy. I sent over a request for the production of 6
individuals with records of Communist activity.
Mr. St. Clair. So you had available time to go into the loyalty
board, didn't you?
Senator McCarthy. We had time
Mr. St. Clair. And you didn't do it ?
Senator McCarthy. We had time.
Mr. St. Clair. But you didn't do it?
Senator McCarthy. Up to this point we have not. We hope to do
it.
Mr. St. Clair. That is all I have, thank you.
Mr. Welch. Senator, would you be good enough
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Is there some of Mr. St. Clair's time left, sir ?
Senator Mundt. The timekeeper tells me it has just expired.
Senators to my right pass ? Senators to the left pass ? Mr. Cohn,
do you pass ?
Mr. Cohn. I pass, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Senator, would you be good enough to look at volume
31 of the record, page 6170 ?
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Senator McCarthy. What was that page number ?
Mr. Welch. 6170.
Senator McCarthy. 6170, right.
Mr. Welch. You are there testifying
Senator Mundt. Start tlie clock.
Mr. Welch. About the memorandum that I have been inquiring
about. Four lines from the bottom you say :
Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr were not in town. I called my office, not for that
purpose along —
the word is a-1-o-n-g, but I think it should be "alone," do you not
agree? Is that right?
Senator McCarthy. You have correctly read the testimony.
2958 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch (reading) :
not for that purpose alone but just to make sure that it would not be forgotten,
because I was leaving the next day, I dictated a memorandum on the Lawton
matter, and it was brought up the next noon and we discussed it in great
detail, may I say, and with considerable vigor on the part of some of the
participants.
Did you mean by that to say the memorandum was brought up the
next noon or the subject was ?
Senator McCarthy. The subject was.
Mr. Welch. If this sounds as if the memorandum was brought
lip — and I think you are right, you must have meant the other
thing — what it really should indicate is that the subject was brought
u]) the next noon ; is that not correct ?
Senator McCarthy. That is the obvious meaning of this answer,
Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. The next noon means at Gasner's Restaurant; is that
right?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. Welch. Now, Senator, you have been both a judge and a
lawyer, and you are familiar with the rule that a witness to a con-
versation ought to state the subject matter and ought to state the
substance of what each person said in the conference, aren't you ? Are
you familiar with that rule?
Senator McCarthy. I don't understand you. If there is anything
pertinent to this investigation, certainly the conversation should be
recited.
Mr. Welch. In substance, although nobody could hope to recall
the precise words ; is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. I think it would be impossible for anyone to
recall the precise words.
Mr. Welch. Bearing in mind your training as a lawyer and a
judge
Senator McCarthy. Thank you.
Mr. Welch. I don't blame you alone, but will you give me the
rare treat of stating in substance what each person said about Lawton
at the lunch? Start it any way you Avant, and give us actually
the best you can, saying "Mr. Adams said in substance; I replied
in substance," or "Mr. Cohn replied in substance," and actually make
a lawyer's ears sing for once by stating it the way it should be stated.
Will you do it, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. I am not sure if I can make your ears sing, but
I will be glad to give you the substance of the conversation.
The substance of it was
Mr. Welch. Who started it? Who spoke first?
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall who spoke first.
Mr, Welch. Pick out somebody.
Senator McCarthy. I won't pick out somebody.
Mr, Welch. "And he said, and somebody else said." You under-
stand how I want it.
Senator McCarthy. I will tell you the substance of the conver-
sation.
Mr. Welch. Who said what, please, sir? Don't give me a resume,
but just tell me who said wliut, in substance.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2959
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, you just got through telling me
that you didn't expect me to repeat verbatim what was said.
Mr. Welch. Who do you say introduced it? Mr. Cohn or Adams
or you or Carr ?
Senator McCarthy. Will you let me proceed now ?
Mr. Welch. Yes. First tell me who introduced the subject.
Senator McCarthy. I don't know.
Mr. Welch, Mr. Carr thought he knew. Did you hear him testify ?
Senator McCarthy. I heard him testify.
Mr. Welch. All right ; who did he think started it ?
Senator McCarthy. You will have to ask Mr. Carr.
Mr. Welch. Don't you remember what he said? Anyhow, Sena-
tor
Senator McCarthy. I think you had better refer to his testimony.
Mr. Welch. Anyhow, start out and tell us the substance of w^hat
each one said.
Senator McCarthy. I have been starting four times, and you inter-
rupt each time.
Mr. Welch. Good. I want to be sure you are going to please me,
not with the content but with the orderliness of your testimony.
Senator McCarthy. I may not please you, Mr. Welch, but I will
give you what happened.
We discussed at great length — T don't know who brought up the sub-
ject— discussed the question of the suggested "breaking" of General
Lawton.
Mr. Welch. That I know.
Senator McCarthy. By "breaking," you understand I mean the
removal of him — General Lawton — from his command.
Mr. Welch. That is the subject matter.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn very vigorously protested and said
this was taking action against a man because he was a witness before
the committee. He pointed out — and Mr. Cohn I think did most of
the talking that day — Mr. Cohn pointed out that if they could break
a general for cooperating with the committee in getting rid of Com-
munists from the secret radar laboratories, that that would mean that
it would be almost impossible for our committee to get testimony in
the future from individuals who had wives, families that depend upon
their salary, that they would be notified in effect that they also would
be broken.
Mr. Adams persisted in saying that it had nothing to do with the
cooperation at Fort Monmouth, that it had something to do with a
statement that General Lawton had made to a staff meeting. There was
no — the matter went back and forth. That is about all I can tell you.
I can't give you the words. It went on for some time. We continued
in the car, Mr. Adams insisting that Lawton had to be broken, insist-
ing that he should get some assurance that our committee would do
nothing about it if he were broken. He didn't get that assurance.
That was the meat of the conversation.
Mr. Welch. Was any other soldier's name mentioned besides
Lawton ?
Senator McCarthy. It may well have been. It was a conversation
of about 3 hours.
Mr. Welch. Was the name of any private mentioned?
2960 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I assume you mean Private Schine. Schine's
name may well have been mentioned. I tliink, as I recall — and keep
in mind that it is impossible to pinpoint these things as to dates 7 or
8 months ago — I think that Adams tried to bring up the subject of
Schine, but Schine wasn't discussed to any length at all. The meat
of the conversation was about the breaking of General Lawton.
Mr. Welch. What little crumb of conversation, if any, was there
about Private Schine?
Senator McCarthy. I can't think of any little crumb of conver-
sation about Schine.
Mr. Welch. Adams never managed to say a word about him; is
that right ?
Senator McCarthy. I can think of no conversation.
Mr. Welch. He was the only one who wanted to talk about him;
is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't know of anyone else who wanted to
talk about the Schine matter. The subject there that disturbed me
very much and disturbed Roy and Frank was the suggested breaking
of General Lawton.
Mr. Welch. Now, Senator, may I turn
Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. Welch, just to — you talk about
a lawyer's evidence. Mr. Cohn that night, with my full agreement —
I don't know who suggested it — called up General Lawton, and his
aide came down the next day, wasn't it, Roy? His aide came down
the next day and we gave him the full information on this matter.
Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy, would you be good enough to pick
up your monitored phone call of the 7th of November 11)53 ?
Senator McCarthy. I would be glad to.
Senator Mundt. Time out.
Time back in.
Senator McCarthy. I have it.
Mr. Welch. Have you it, sir?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir,
Mr, Welch. Will you read it along with me ? It begins with you
addressing the Secretary of the Army as Bob; is that right?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
Bob, did that work all rigbt to your satisfaction yesterday?
Yes, it did, Joe, And I appreciate your taking a very broad view of the
thing.
Senator JSIcCarthy. That is correct.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
Senator. We both have the same interests and we both are working at the
same job.
Correct, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes ; that is an excellent job of reading.
]\Ir. Welch (reading) :
Secretary of the Army. I was worried at first, but the way it wound up
I was satisfied with it and I want to thank you.
Senator. I would like to ask you one personal favor. For God's sake, don't
put Dave in service and assign him back to my committee, from three standpoints.
That sounds a little like you, doesn't it. Senator?
Senator McCarthy. Go right ahead. I am listening.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 2961
Mr. Welch (reading) :
One, I couldu't get away with any more than a week. The newspapers would
be back on us, and you would have to send him back into uniform anyway
Two, this thing has been running along so cleanly so far they have not been
able to bat your brains out. There is nothing the left-wingers would like better
They don't like this cooperation between the committee and the Army. And"
the third thing, they would say I asked for it. From my desk today I can pick
up letters from, perhaps, a half dozen letters from mothers whose' boys are in
worse shape than Dave ; and it would be embarrassing if held to me.
Senator McCarthy. I think, Mr. Welch, that "held to me" doesn't
quite make sense. Apparently the young man who was doing the
eavesdropping missed something there.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
If he could get off weekends— Roy— it is one of the few things I have seen
him completely unreasonable about— he thinks Dave should be a general and
work from the penthouse of the Waldorf.
Under cross-examination by Mr. Jenkins, did I understand you to
say that at some point in that paragraph of yours you berame jocular?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, let's you and I not do any clever
little things here now. Will you just glance through that and tell
us what you left out Avhen you read that ?
Mr. Welch. I didn't mean to. Where did you think— would you
read it, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. You left out this statement :
He is a good man, but there is nothing indispensable about him.
Mr. Welch. Curiously enough, I had a copy which had those words
missing.
He is a good man
Senator McCarthy (reading) :
Good boy —
I beg your pardon —
but there is nothing
Mr. Welch (reading) :
indispensable about him. In my desk today I pick up letters from, perhaps, a
half dozen letters from mothei-s whose boys are in worse shape than Dave; and
it would be embarrassing if held to me.
That word "held" you think should be changed ?
Senator McCarthy. Well, the sentence doesn't quite make sense,
that "held to me." I notice there are three or four dots after, indi-
cating that the young man who was monitoring missed something.
Mr. Welch. Not after the word "me," is there ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, after the word "me" there are three dots.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
If he could get off weekends— Roy —
and then two dots —
it is one of the few things I have seen him completely unreasonable about.
What was it that Koy was so unreasonable about ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't think he was unreasonable. Roy and
I diifered. I had gotten Karl Barslaag to come down- and attempt
to write the various reports— how many reports were there ? About
2962 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
four ? Three that Dave had to do with— Karl Barslaag, an excellent
researcher. I felt that Karl could write the reports merely from
the transcripts of the testimony. Boy didn't think that he could. He
felt that it took a man that had been livinfj with this, working with
it, as Dave had been for a long time. It so happened Roy was right.
I thought that he was wrong at that time, but this is one of the few
times I will concede that Roy was right on that
Mr. Welch. Then, if I uiiderstand you, Senator, the thing that you
meant to refer to there was that Roy was unreasonable about wanting
Schine to work on weekends, is that right ?
Senator McCarthy. Yes.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has again expired.
Any questions from the head table ?
Mr.Cohn?
Mr. CoHN. No, sir.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have another 10 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Then, Senator, the next sentence :
He thinks Dave should be a general and work from the penthouse at the Wal-
dorf.
Did you mean to attach that remark to this subsequent named
Barslaag?
Senator McCarthy. That, Mr. Welch, is obviously a completely
facetious remark, because
Mr. Welch. Do you think there should be "ha-ha" after it? Is
that right?
Senator McCarthy. Because neither Mr. Stevens nor Mr. Cohn
nor I ever thought that you should have a general working from the
penthouse at the Waldorf.
Mr. Welch. Now let me go to your next sentence or next para-
graph :
. . . take that into consideration and ask that he be immediately assigned.
Roy was next to quitting the committee.
Was that funny ?
Senator McCarthy. Was what?
Mr. Welch. Was that funny ?
Roy was next to quitting the committee.
Senator McCarthy. You say was that funny ?
Mr. Welch. Yes. Were you trying to be facetious there?
Senator McCarthy. I don't think it would be funny if Roy would
quit the committee.
Mr. Welch. And you weren't trying to be funny, were you. Sen-
ator ?
Senator McCarthy. No, I would say that wasn't funny.
Mr. Welch. "He thought I had gone back on the committee."
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Welch, didn't you omit a paragraph?
Mr. Welch. What the Secretary of the Army said. I am attaching
significance to only what the Senator said. If you think I should
read it, I quickly will.
Senator McCarthy. Let me read what you omitted, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. You may. I am interested in your words, but you
may certainly read his.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2963
Senator McCarthy (reading) :
The Secretary. That is where my problem has come from, risht from the
start. You never have done or said anything that spurred me on in this situa-
tion at all, other than to take a friendly interest.
I read that, Mr. Welch, because this completely contradicts any
claim that I ever attempted to get any special consideration for Dave.
Mr, Welch. And Secretary Stevens is not in a very "ha-ha" frame
of mind in his answer to what you say was a facetious remark, is he?
Senator McCarthy. This is not a matter of ha-ha.
Mr, Welch. You told me
Senator JNIcCarthy. This is a matter, Mr. Welch, a matter of
charges made and publicized that we have been hearing now for
weeks, that I tried to get special consideration for Mr. Schine. We
find here in this phone call which was monitored not by me but by Mr.
Stevens, the Secretary says :
You have never done anything that spurred me on other than to take a friendly
interest.
Mr. Welch. Yes. But would you let your mind, your eye, rest on
the last sentence that you spoke, just above where you are, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. You may read that over.
Mr. Welch (reading) ;
He thinks Dave should be a general and work from the Penthouse of the
Waldorf.
If I understand your testimony, it is to the effect that you said that
with a sort of a chuckle ; is that right, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Well, Mr. Welch, obviously, if that was said,
it was said facetiously.
Mr. Welch. Did you say it with sort of a chuckle?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, that is obviously a facetious re-
mark.
Mr. Welch. Well, will you answer my question ? Did you chuckle
when you said it ?
Senator McCarthy. Did I chuckle? Did I chuckle, you say ?
Mr. Welch. Yes.
Senator McCartjiy. I don't recall having chuckled.
]Mr. Welch. Did the Secretary of the Army chuckle when he
replied ?
Senator McCarthy. I don't recall the Secretary chuckled.
Mr. Welch. Now look at your next sentence where you were speak-
ing:
. . . take that into consideration and ask that he be immediately assigned.
Roy was next to quitting the committee. He thought I had gone back on the
committee. And for God's sake don't tell anything of this because he
would go right back and tell Roy.
Was that facetious?
Senator McCarthy. No.
Mr. Welch. That was serious ?
Senator McCarthy. Eight.
Mr. Welch. So that you asked the Secretary not to report this
conversation to a certain individual, because if he were to do so, that
individual in turn would go right back and tell Koy ?
That is what is says ; isn't it ?
2964 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. No. It is said here, and you will notice there
are a lot of dots here, indicating things were left out. I pointed out
to the Secretary
Mr. Welch. There are no dots there.
Senator McCarthy. Yes, there are. You will find three dots here.
Mr. Welch. Where, at the opening of the sentence ?
Senator McCarthy. Right.
Mr. Welch. Yes, but that is three sentences back.
Senator McCarthy. Could I
Mr. Welch. Will you listen to me, Senator? I am reading the
one that says :
And for God's sake don't tell anything of this, because he would go
right back and tell Roy.
There are no dots in that sentence ; are there ?
Senator McCarthy. There are dots in my answer.
Mr. Welch. Dots in your answer ?
Senator McCarthy. And the eavesdropper says he left material
out where there are dots. So I will tell you what I recall was said.
Mr. Welch. This tells us what was said.
Senator McCarthy. No, it doesn't.
Mr. Welch. Have you any doubt that this monitored phone call is
accurate, sir?
Senator McCarthy. The man who did the eavesdropping said Avhere
he put dots in the answer, material w as left out.
Mr. Welch. But, Senator, let's be fair about it. There are no dots
in that last sentence; are there?
Senator McCarthy. Let's do tiiat, Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. There are no dots in the last sentence.
Senator McCarthy. Let's do just that. You said "Let's be fair."
Mr. Welch. You be fair with me, sir, and look at your document
and tell me, are there any dots in the sentence that begins :
And for God's sake don't tell anything of this, because he would go
right back and tell Koy.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. AVelch, in my statement here, the young
man who monitored the call — I guess that is the delicate term for
eavesdropping
Mr. Welch. He was Jack Lucas. We all remember him, I believe.
Senator McCarthy. Said that where he put dots, that indicated
material was missing. I will tell you what was said here, if you like.
There was material missing.
I discussed with Bob the im])ortance of having Mr. Schine available
to finish committee work. 1 did tell him that I thought that Roy
and I difTered very strongly — I may have used the word "unreason-
able"— about the necessity for his being available at all times when
he was not in training.
The Secretary agreed, I believe, with Mr. Cohn to make him avail-
able at all times wlien he was not in training. I think that was a good
thing.
Mr. Welcil Are you reading things into this memorandum which
you say are missing where dots are?
Senator McCarthy. Pardon ?
Mr. Welch. Are you reading things into this memorandum, this
monitored telephone call, to fill in the spots wdiere there are dots?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2965
Senator IMcCarthy. I am just telling you what the conversation
was as I recall.
Mr. Welch. Will you give me a resume of it ? I think we have the
conversation. Do you deny that you said, "And for God's sake don't
tell anything of this because he would go right back and tell
Eoy." Do you deny that you said it ?
Senator McCarthy. I think I most likely said that.
Mr. Welch. I do, too. Do you want to say anything else about it?
There are no dots in connection with it, are there ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch, don't try to be clever with me. I
just pointed out that there were dots here showing that parts of the
conversation were missing. I told you what I thought those missing
parts were.
Mr. Welch. Let's get on, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. Let's do that.
Mr. Welch. Would you like to read what the Secretary said to you,
because I am not interested in it but you may certainly read it if you
would like to. Would you like to, sir ?
Senator McCarthy. Let me glance through it.
(Senator McCarthy examining document.)
Senator JVIcCarthy. I think as long as we are reading
Mr. Welch. Go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. The monitored call, we should read all of it.
I am not sure that it has any pertinency, but let's put everything in.
The Secretary, I would rather not tell anybody anything. And as far as
what you have said, I am not going to do anything except to have him go
through the re£ular thing — maybe a weekend here or there, or something of
that kind. Actually, on the 2-week thing, I said I had personally arranged this
thing because I wanted him to be available to help your committee get along
further with this thing. That is the way the thing was done —
then there are dashes —
Actually, on the 2-week thing, I said I personally arranged this thing because
I wanted him to be available to help your committee get along further with
this thing.
Then a bunch of dots again. This is the Secretary, incidentally.
That is the way the thing was done, and I felt that was the proper way to
handle it. I tliiuk I know what you mean, and I will handle it in the proper
way along the lines you have been talking about.
Mr. Welch. Then, Senator, you said — may I read your part, sir?
Senator McCarthy. You certainly may.
Mr. Welch (reading) :
If you put him into service to work with the committee, all hell would break
loose, and the President would be calling you not to play favorites because any-
one is on a committee. I think for Roy's sake if you could let him come back
for weekends or something, so his girls won't get too lonesome — maybe if they
shave his hair off, he won't want to come back.
And the Secretary said :
I will take care of it and I appreciate your whole attitude on it yesterday.
Senator Muxdt. Mr, Welch, your time has again expired.
Any questions from the committee table, or from Mr. Colin?
Mr. CoHN. Not a thing, sir.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have another 10 minutes.
IVIr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, you will recall this morning when we
had the big to-do that was touched off by the chairman, that I asked
2966 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
for the riglit to read into the record a statement by the Secretary of
the Army. It has just come to me, and may I now read it ? It is short.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dirkj^en. A parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman. Is this
the statement, Mr. Welch, that we talked about this morning?
Mr. Welch. That is right.
Senator Dirksen. How long is it?
Mr. Welch. It is about 2i/2 pages. I will read it swiftly.
Senator Symington. I request that it be read.
Senator Dirksen. Our understanding this morning was that it was
to become an exhibit in the record.
Mr. Welch. No. I wish to have it read, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Dirksen. I don't think there is any objection to that.
Mr. Welch. Good.
Senator Dirksen. What I am curious about is whether it now be-
comes a subject for examination and cross-examination.
Mr. Welch. The committee voted that Mr. Stevens could make a
statement as a consequence of the conversation this morning, and that
statement is here now, and I wish to put it in evidence.
Senator Dirksen. I have no objection.
Senator Mundt. You may read it.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy?
Senator McCarthy. I don't want at this late time to hold up the
proceedings. However, the Secretary of the Army was on the stand
here for, I believe, 18 or 19 days. He had a complete and full oppor-
tunity to tell us about his conversations with Senator Symington,
with Mr. Clark Clilford, who was advising him. He saw fit not to
do that.
Now, when we find out accidentally who is giving him that advice, if
he puts a statement in the record, unsworn, I think it is just highly
improper, no reason for it. He was here. He had an opportunity to
give us all the information.
I would say this: If he has information that he wants to furnish
in regard to the conversations with our friend from Missouri and
with Clark Cliiford, then what we should do is have Mr. Jenkins have
him sw^orn, with some member of the committee present, and let him
submit that under oath. Otherwise, we are just opening up an en-
tirely new field.
I emphasize, in conclusion, that the Secretary was not taken by
surprise on this. He was asked in detail who had induced the filing
of the fraudulent charges, who was behind them. He knew that that
was the thing that we were perhaps more concerned about than any-
thing else.
The Secretary for some reason kept it secret that the advice was
coming from Senator Symington ; also the Democrat adviser, Mr.
Clifford. I just think it violates all the rules of evidence ancl law
to put this statement in here at this time, unsword to. We don't
know who it was prepared by. Someone said that the Secretary, I
believe, had gone to Quantico. I don't know wlio prepared this.
I would like to have that done at least in deposition form, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will say if the statement is read it would
have the same status as a statement that the Secretary would make to
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2967
the press. Of course the Chair would have no ruling on what the
Secretary would make to the press. He would have a right to make
it. He recognizes that Mr. Welch is not testifying. He is the attor-
ney. The Chair has no objection of course to the Secretary of the
Army making any statement he wants to to the press which will be
publicized as this will be publicized. But he recognizes it is not sworn
testimony and consequently will be considered in the nature of a
statement that the Secretary could make from the Pentagon as well as
from here. It is a statement he could make at any time during the hear-
ings or any time after the hearings as any other official has a right
to make a public statement.
Senator McCarthy. May I make one suggestion ?
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. If the Secretary has a statement which he
wants to give to the press I think he should issue it to the press. So
far we have nothing in the record that is not sworn testimony. I
just don't think it is a wise thing at this late moment to put anything
in the record which is not sworn to, where it can't be cross-examined.
If Mr. Welch has a statement there, we have all the members of the
press here. He can mimeograph that. The Secretary hasn't been
bashful about mimeographing things. Let him hand it out to the
press.
It is now about 5 : 15 and we are trying to finish tonight. I know if
there is read into the record a 2i/2-page statement, we just won't get
through here tonight.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. On ]\Iarch 18, 1 believe — it was in March I am
sure — in an open hearing before the Senate Armed Services Commit-
tee I asked the Secretary of Defense if he would give to this commit-
tee all monitored telephone calls. The record will bear that out. I
never at any time have tried to hold up monitored calls. The record
will bear out the fact that I have at all times tried to get the monitored
calls into the record. It would have been impossible for Mr. Stevens
to have testified with respect to the monitored calls because at the
time he testified they had not been put in the record. A great many
statements, and in my opinion misstatements, have been made with
respect to this situation and certainly one of two steps that, if the
chairman has an ounce of fairness in him in this situation — and I am
sure he has — should be taken.
Either this statement should now be read into the record or Mr.
Stevens and the other people that we have recommended should be
called before this committee and put under oath so we can get all the
truth.
Senator McCarthy. Just one final suggestion, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. Could I make this suggestion first, Senator
Dirksen.
I would suggest to save time that we mark this as an exhibit. If the
press wants to see it, let them see it. But as of now, Mr. Chairman,
I don't know whether Clark Clifford wrote this. I don't know who
wrote it. If it is to be read into the record as part of the testimony it
should be done under oath. I have no objection to keeping anything
secret that Bob Stevens wants to say. I just don't like to make that
2968 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
part of the official record. It can be marked as an exhibit, and the
press can have it — period.
Senator Symington, It was miofhty funny that the Republicans
don't want to hear what the Republican Secretary of the Army has
to say.
Senator McCarthy. Mr, Symington
Senator Mundt. The Chair is disturbed at the moment by this
fact, and that is he agrees that we should find a way, certainly, in which
Secretary Stevens could make his position clear. It is suggested as
a press statement and perhaps as an exhibit in the record, to be part
of the hearings so the people can read it, accompanied by a press state-
ment, as a solution. I am presently disturbed by this fact, that at the
beginning of the hearings, under a resolution introduced, I think, by
Senator McClellan, it was stated that all of the testimony in these
hearings should be taken under oath. We have operated on that basis,
even to the point one time, I recall, of calling Secretary Stevens up
and asking him to recite under oath a ])ress statement that he had
made previously, dealing with one of the collateral issues before the
committee. It seems to me we might be able to arrive at the thing
we all want, and that is to have Mr, Stevens have a fair chance to make
his statement, by offering it as an exhibit and making it available to
the press.
Senator Dirksen, Mr, Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. The Chair recognizes Senator Dirksen.
Senator Dirksen. Frankly, I didn't know whether I was under a
misapprehension this morning about the statement, I thought it was
going to be submitted and just included in the record. It is not under
oath, of course, it is not a deposition. Mr. Stevens wouldn't be here
and available for cross-examination on such a statement. We haven't
the slightest idea what is in it. It doesn't make any difference to me.
But in the complete interest of fairness, I suggest a 5-minute recess
so that counsel may confer with Mr. Welch. I think at least the com-
mittee counsel ought to be advised on this matter. I shall be entirely
guided by his
Mr, Welch, Mr, Chairman, I ask for recognition.
Senator Mundt, Mr. Welch ?
Mr, Welch, I don't wish to compete with the Senator for the micro-
phone, I beg your pardon.
Senator Mundt. I recognized you, Mr. Welch.
Senator Symington. Senator McClellan Avanted to speak.
Senator Mundt. I am sorry. I recognized Mr, Welch, Either one.
Senator McClellan?
Senator McClellan, Mr, Chairman, the Chair is correct in stating
that I made the motion that all testimony in this hearing be taken un-
der oath. I think Senator McCarthy's position is sound, I therefore
move, Mr, Chairman, that Secretary Stevens be invited to come here
and testify to the document under oath. That will settle it.
Senator Jackson, I second the motion.
Senator Dirksen. Mr, Chairman, I move to lay that motion on the
table. It is not debatable. The motion is not debatable.
Senator Mundt. The motion we have before us now is to call Secre-
tary Stevens as a witness, and the motion has been seconded, and we
have a motion to lay that on the table.
Senator Pointer. I second it.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2969
Senator Jackson. Limit it to this specific document.
Senator Mundt. The motion is obviously not debatable, as all stu-
dents of parliamentary law understand, so the Chair will call the roll
as to whether we will lay that motion on the table or not.
Senator McClellan. A parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman. A
vote "no" is a vote to call Stevens and let him testify under oath and
a vote "aye" is a vote not to call him, isn't that correct, under the
parliamentary situation ?
Senator Mundt. You are incorrect. The vote "aye" is to lay it on
the table and the vote "no" is not to lay it on the table.
Senator McClellan. The vote "aye" means the motion to call him
as a witness will not prevail and will be defeated, is that correct ?
Senator Mundt. As of now, that is quite obviously true.
Senator McClellan. Call the roll.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan?
Senator McClellan. No.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dirksen. Aye.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. No.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter?
Senator Potter. Aye.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. No.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak?
Senator Dworshak. Aye.
Senator Mundt. The Chair votes "aye." The motion is lost. The
Chair recognizes Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, it just so happens that the Secretary
of the Army is on his way out of town on very important Army busi-
ness, and I knew this morning that he had to go. Knowing that, I
asked the Chair for the right to file and read this statement, and a
vote was passed to that effect this morning. It is not of earth-shaking
consequence. It is not a very long one. It could have been read long
ago. I think it is a courtesy that should be extended to the Secretary
of the Army, before the audience that has heard the testimony, this
simple and reasonably short statement should be made. I so under-
stood the vote this morning, and the Secretary prepared the state-
ment before he left on this Army business. I think I should be
allowed to read it.
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch has the floor. Do you yield to Senator
McClellan?
Mr. Welch. I don't have the right to yield, but go ahead, sir.
Senator McClellan. You have the floor. I think you do. All I
want to do is to clarify this situation. Is this a statement in the
nature of rebuttal to testimony that has been given ?
Mr. Welch. I wouldn't say so.
Senator McClellan. What is the purpose of it? If it is not testi-
mony, if it is not rebuttal, I don't want to fool with it.
Mr. Welch. The principal purpose of it is to state what contact
the Secretary of the Army had with Clark Clifford, which was
Senator McClellan. That is in the nature of rebuttal, I would
assume.
2970 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. I would think it was not rebuttal. It was the long
hassle this morning with Senators telling this and that, and here is
a member of the Government who then secured and now has, as I
view it, by vote of this committee, a right to submit a simple statement
on that matter.
Senator McClellan. Mr. Welch, the Secretary
Senator McCarthy. One second, do you mind, while this is being
argued, do you mind if I take a 3-minute recess? I promised to make
a call at 5 o'clock. I am 20 minutes late. I will be back before
Senator Mundt. You may go, if your counsel remains while the
thing is argued.
Senator Symington. Can we have it read, can we have it read now,
or does the Senator prefer to wait?
Does he want to stop the hearing now or can we go ahead and have
it read?
Senator McCarthy. I don't care what you do with it.
Senator Mundt. The Chair is disturbed primarily by the fact that
he is trying to find a way to get this statement into the record, and
to make it public, but he sort of has to operate under the rule made,
and I think wisely, by Senator McClellan, which was to take all testi-
mony under oath.
Senator Potter. Mr. Chairman, I move that we suspend the rule
and allow the counsel to read the statement.
Senator Symington. I second the motion.
Senator Mundt. Very well. That will clarify it. Those in favor
of the motion signify by saying "aye." Those opposed say "no."
Mr. Welch, you may read the statement.
Mr. Welch. Thank you.
It is addressed, Mr. Chairman, to you. It is dated June 17, 1954,
and I now read it :
Dear Mb. Chairman : Much has been said during the recent days of the hear-
inirs about certain incidents which occurred during the days immediately before
and after Washington's Birthday. In response to a suggestion by Mr. Welch,
the committee has agreed to accept from me a short narrative statement of
the facts. I appreciate this opportunity.
About midafternoon on February IS, 1954, Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway, Army
Chief of Staff, and I called upon Senator Symington. The Senator had sug-
gested to me a few days previously that he would like to talk to the Chief of
Staff and to me. Having known Senator Symington for many years, and being
well aware of his great interest in the military, I was delighted of the oppor-
tunity to review with him as a member of the Armed Services Committee some
of the problems then currently facing the Army. It so happened that this con-
versation took place almost at the very hour when General Zwicker was being
told in executive session of this committee in New York by Senator McCarthy
that he was not fit to wear that uniform.
Neither General Ridgway nor I knew anything about this incident at the time
of our visit to Senator Symington's office. Senator Symington was most help-
ful in the discussion of Army matters, and stated that if he could be of any
assistance to the Army, please to let him know. Little did I realize that within
24 hours I would take advantage of his offer.
General Ridgway informed me on the morning of February 19 what had hap-
pened to General Zwicker on the previous afternoon. I called Senator Syming-
ton and told him of my desire to see him during the day, and that I would call
on such other members of the committee as might be available. During that day,
I did personally call on Senator Symington, Senator Dirksen, Senator Mundt,
Senator Potter, and Senator McClellan. I would have first called the chairman,
Senator McCarthy, if he had been in town. I did not learn his whereabouts until
the morning of February 20, when I telephoned him at Albany, a call which is
now among the records of this committee. Senator Jackson was also out of
town.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2971
While I was conferring with Senator Syminston, he telephoned and invited
Mr. Clark Clifford to come to his office. I had no idea of meeting Mr. Clifford
when I called at Senator Symington's office. Before Mr. Clifford arrived, Sena-
tor Symington suggested that I attempt to postpone any hearings on the Zwicker
case for 2 weeks, until he returned from Europe and could be present. He also
dictated a letter to Senator McCarthy, requesting such a postponement.
Shortly thereafter Mr. Clifford arrived and for about 20 minutes, Mr. Clif-
ford, Senator Symington, and I discussed whether I should appear before the
subcommittee during Senator Symington's absence in Europe. They advised me
not to do so. However, on February 21, I decided to issue a public statement on
the Zwicker matter. This statement indicated that I personally would a^ear
before the subcommittee whenever requested. Since Senator Symington had
by then departed for his trip to Europe and since my proposed statement indi-
cated the likelihood that I would appear before the committee in advance of
Senator Symington's return from Europe, my recollection is that as a matter of
courtesy I telephoned Mr. Clifford and so advised him. I had no contact with
Mr. Clifford thereafter. My statement covering the Zwicker matter was re-
leased to the press on the afternoon of February 21, and I transmitted tlie
copy of the statement by cable personal expense to Senator Symington in Paris.
On February 22, Washington's Birthday, Senator Mundt and I attended the
Freedom Foundation exercise at Valley Forge, Pa. We discussed the Zwicker
matter at considerable length. It never occurred to me to mention that I had
met Senator Symington's lawyer, Mr. Clifford, in the Senator's office on the
previous Friday afternoon. Little did I think the 20-minute conversation would
be blown up as it has been. On February 23, with members of my staff, I worked
in preparing my statement on the Zwicker case, which I expected to deliver to
the subcommittee at the meeting which had then been scheduled by Senator
McCarthy for the following Thursday, February 25. Late in the afternoon of
that day, I was called at home by Senator Mundt who invited me to a luncheon
the next day with the Republican members of this committee. He said that I
should not bring anyone with me, and should not discuss the matter with any-
one. I now restate my previous testimony before this committee as to mv
attitude toward the luncheon of February 24. I stated on page 1457 of the
transcript that I was "unhappy" about the results of the luncheon. Senator
Dirksen will also remember that I talked with him privately after we left the
meeting. I wanted him to know of my feeling that a great mistake had been
made. This discussion took place on the steps of the Capitol, and is referred
to in the first sentence of my phone call of February 25, with the Senator, which
is already in the record. With respect to the memorandum of understanding
of February 24, to which Senator Mundt referred this morning, I now state that
point No. 4 reads as follows : "In view of the foregoing memorandum of under-
standing, the hearings for tomorrow have been canceled."
The cancellation of the hearings was fully covered in the press conference at
the end of the luncheon meeting. Twelve days later when Senator Symington
called me on March 8 about the Schine matter, I wished to diminish interest in
that subject if possible. It seems to me there were many more important prob-
lems. I understated the seriousness of the situation in the hope it would not
be necessary to send the details to the Congress. Rapidly mounting pressure,
however, was such that it required making a statement' of the facts to the
Congress shortly thereafter.
I thank you for this opportunity to make this statement a part of the record.
Sincerely yours,
RoEEKT T. Stevens,
Secretary of the Army.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer but not read, if I may, a com-
munication in the form of a cable from General Reber, who, as you
know, left this room to take his European command. It is not sworn
evidence, but it is a statement by cable. I would appreciate it if it
Avould be received by the committee and given such weiglit as they
deem it is entitled to.
Senator Mundt. We will be happy to receive it, Mr. Welch, the same
as we have received a number of other statements, and ta;.e it up at
our executive meeting tomorrow morning.
2972 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. CoiiN. Mr. Chairman, I was just going to say this. Of course
we have heard Mr. Stevens' statement now. I think there are some
very interesting facets to it. Tliere are some contradictions to ctate-
ments he made in the monitored telephone call. There are further
indications of what would be contradictory testimony, if he had said
tliis under oath. I think it points up very well the wise rule tlie
subcommittee has followed of only having testimony taken under oath.
I personally feel, sir, that from this point on, certainly we should have
nothing more in the record from witnesses unless it is submitted under
oath.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. May the Chair respond to the point by saying that
we do not plan to make it a rule, certainly, to accept any testimony
.which is not taken under oath. The Chair was relieved of his respon-
sibility of enforcing the committee rule by the motion by Senator
Potter to suspend the rules for this purpose, and this one purpose
alone. So that statement, I am sure, is not going to be followed by
a series. The second statement will be accepted for the committee,
at the suggestion of Mr. Welch, for consideration in our executive
session. That is our understanding.
Senator Symington ?
Senator Symington. I just wanted to present to the Chair that in
the discussion of the chicken luncheon w^hen he was not under oath
sometime earlier today, he brought up considerable aspects with re-
spect to Mr. Clark Clifford, and therefore I think that he set a prece-
dent which was proper in what he said, and I think Mr. Welch's asking
to read the letter was also proper in the reading of the letter.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you may continue with your 10 min-
utes. How much time has been consumed?
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, there always comes a time in any law-
suit, no matter how long it is, when some lawyer says those rather
magic words in a courtroom, "I rest," and those words I now say.
Senator Mundt. That is fine. Do any members of the committee
have any questions to ask of the witness before we dismiss him?
Mr. CoiiN. Yes, sir.
Senator Mundt. We will start around the table. Senator Dwor-
shak, do you have any further questions to ask the witness?
We will come to you, Mr. Cohn. Your time hasn't come, Mr.
Jenkins, have you any questions to ask the witness at this time?
May the Chair say that several of his colleagues have suggested that
they might like to say a word or two at the conclusion of these hearings
after we have agreed that there are to be no more questions. So if
the members of the committee have a salutatory word to say as we
conclude this business, I suggest they withhold them now until we find
out whether there are any other questions to be asked. After that,
the Chair will recognize any member of the committee for any state-
ment he might want to make.
Are there any questions you would like to ask of the witness, Mr.
Jenkins?
Mr. Jenkins. No further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt, The Chair has no questions to ask at this time.
Has Senator McClellan?
Senator McClellan. No questions.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2973
Senator Mundt. Has Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dirksen. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Has Senator Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Has Senator Potter? Has Senator Symington?
Senator Symington. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Has Senator Dworshak?
Senator Dworshak. Yes, I would like to ask some.
Senator Mundt. The photographers will please take their seats.
Senator Dworshak ?
Senator Dworshak. Senator, as we complete these hearings, lasting
36 clays, we realize the repercussions have reached into every section
of the country and that there are various results concerning the charges
and countercharges. I think the people may be aroused emotionally
over this hearing, but I am sure they are more concerned about the
future activities to eliminate all subversives from the Federal Gov-
ernment.
So at that point, I ask you what your plans are for continuing your
crusade on behalf of this subcommittee, and to what extent you expect
to cooperate with the Department of the Army and the various agen-
cies and bureaus in the executive branch of the Government ? I think
it is very vital to know at this time in behalf of the millions of Ameri-
cans who have listened to these hearings and observed the proceedings
over TV to have an expression from you as to your future planning.
Senator McCarthy. Senator Dworshak, I think that that is cer-
tainly an excellent question to ask as we close these hearings. I will
try to answer it as best I can. We have a number of hearings now
pending. May I say that I have promised Mrs. McCarthy back here
that I will take off about 3 days and do nothing except relax after
these hearings.
I think perhaps one of the hearings that could first be held— and
I hope we can start that immediately — are the hearings of which
Senator Potter is chairman, hearings having to do with American
citizens still being held in Communist prison camps, some of them
since World War II.
Is that right, Charlie?
Senator Potter. We will be ready next week.
Senator McCarthy. No. 2, I think one of the extremely important
hearings that we should go into is the exposure of Communists in
defense plants. Many of our defense plants, as you know, handle
secret and top secret material.
No. 3, I hope that I can get this committee — and I don't want to
start an argument on that now — I hope I can get this investigating
committee to agree with me that we should call the members of that
old loyalty board — they are no longer acting on the loyalty board;
they have been disbanded by Bob Stevens, a very wise act on his part,
I think — and find out what they are doing. Are they handling secret,
top secret, or other material ? I think the American people should
know why, over the past 5, 6, 8, or 10 years, they were sending people
with clear-cut Communist records into our secret plants.
Another matter, I think, is the Peress case. I would like to know
the names and let the American people know the names — I would like
to spread on the record the names of those who gave this special con-
2974 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
s^deration to a man Avho was a graduate of a Communist leadership
school.
We liave one other hearing, Senator, which I believe is now being
handled by the Capehart connnittee. That has to do with the alleged
graft and corruption and fraud in some Alaskan projects.
There will be the very important question of whether or not we can
go into the alleged Communist infiltration of CIA, what authority,
what ])ower, we have there. Also, the question of what, if anything,
we should do in regard to alleged Communist infiltration of the
atomic and hydrogen bomb plants.
May I say in that connection, Avhile Senator Symington and I have
diifered on many things, I thought he made an excellent suggestion
when that matter came up. He suggested that I take that matter up
Avith the White House and determine whether or not they would give
us full cooperaion, whether or not they felt this would endanger
luational security because of the many subjects we could not discuss
publicly. That was done. I was convinced at that time that it would
not be in the national interest to go into the matter of atomic and
hydrogen bomb plants.
There are many other subjects that we have pending, but I think I
have hit the high points of the things that should be investigated.
Senator Davorshak. Senator, undoubtedly the people Avho have fol-
loAved these hearings for several weeks are AAondering whether the
appearances of ill aaIII which have been engendered betAveen the De-
partment of the Army and probably the staff of this subcommittee Avill
be reflected in future activities or to Avhat extent AA'ill there be complete
cooperation in trying to expose and root out espionage within the
Federal Government. Can you tell us very briefly ? I don't want to
prolong this hearing, but I think that aa'c haA^e had disagreements, Ave
have had some misunderstandings, but I think that the people will feel
there has been an obvious waste of time in holding these hearings
unless there will be forthcoming some assurances that aa'b will move
forward in these important and vital efforts to root out espionage
AAithin the Federal Government, and to accomplish this Ave must have
the fullest cooperation.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, may I say — I will take 30 seconds on
this — may I say, No. 1, that I have no ill Avill, not CA^en remotely,
against anyone in the Department of the Army. I hope that Ave can
work out complete cooperation, No. 1.
No. 2, may I say. Senator, that our difficulty has not been Avith the
iniinformed men, except Avith a feAv rare exce])tions. Our difficulty
has been Avith the old Pentagon civilian politicians Avho think they
should be running the Army. As far as the military men are con-
cerned, the men in uniform, I think Ave can safely assume that much
more than 99 percent are good, loyal Americans Avilling to fight and
die for their country.
Beyond that, I don't know. I just hope we can work out some for-
mula Avhereby the American people can knoAV Avhat is going on Avithout
ii> any Avay endangering national security.
May I say. Senator Dworshak, I think that you have taken less time,
you have Avasted less time than any man, including myself, any man on
this committee. I think that you have desisted Avhen normally I would
expect you to be interrupting.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2975
If all of US, Senator, had used the constraint that you have used,
"we would have been out of here many days before today and back
investigating^ Communists.
Senator Dworshak. I can say to you. Senator McCarthy, that the
reason I haven't taken very much time is not because of a lack of inter-
est on my part in these proceedings.
Senator McCarthy. I know that.
Senator Dworshak. I have been vitally interested, but I think that
we have far more important business.
For instance, this afternoon on the floor of the Senate we had a
$29 billion defense appropriation bill. Here we have immobilized
eight Senators who were not permitted to participate in the discus-
sion or even in the marking up of that important bill.
So I want merely to stress that I think the major consideration at
this time is to close the ranks and to eliminate misunderstanding and
the disagreements which have developed on this important question, so
that we can give assurances to the American people that in spending
these billions of dollars on national defense, we must not be unaware
of the importance of having esprit de corps and having the congres-
sional committees and the officials in the executive department fully
cooperating to insure an adequate national defense in these crucial
times.
Senator McCarthy. Senator, may I again take 30 seconds. I think
I can agree wholeheartedly with what you said. While we have been
immobilized and have spent a vast amount of time and vast expendi-
ture of funds of the connnittee investigating fraudulent charges, I
think that one of the very, very good things that have come from this
connnittee, one of the most important things, has been the result of
television. I have been receiving 7,000 or 8,000 letters a day. I find
now, with some 20 or 22 million people having this Senate committee
in effect in their living room watching the Senate committee, they
realize how badly and how dishonestly distorted is the news by a few — •
and I emphasize "a few" because a vast amount of the working press
liere I think are very competent and loyal people — but how a few of
the columnists have succeeded in deceiving the American people. I
think that that is one of the good things that have come from this
liearing, Senator Dworshak. In other words, I don't think the t'w.Q
has all been wasted.
Senator Dworshak. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. I think Mr. Cohn indicated he had some questions.
Mr. Cohn. I will be very brief. Senator.
At one point. Senator McCarthy, before the hearings conclude, which
I guess is just about now, now that you have been on the stand for
some da5'S and you have waived immunity and have been examined
and cross-examined, I think it might be appropriate to ask you this
in conclusion. Perhaps the best testament to your work is contained
on those charts over at the end of the room which I had prepared.
They are entitled "Official Communist Party Line on McCarthy," and
thej^ contain articles from the Daily Worker and other Communist
Party publications which indicate that the No. 1 menace to the Com-
munist movement, the Communist conspiracy seeking to destroy this
Xation, has been activities participated in by you and the warnings
which you have been giving to the American people for a period of
years.
2976 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Calling attention to those and to various other items in Communist
publications, I want to close on that note of what I think is tribute to
somebody who for so long a period of time during these 2 months
has had to sit here and take so very much.
I have nothing further.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, there is one thing I would like
to introduce into the record — I don't want to take the time to read
it — excerpts from the Constitution of the Commuist Party, Theses and
Statutes of the Communist Party, some of the top writings, giving the
objectives of the party. It is a 2-page document. I would like to
introduce that in the record if I may.
Senator Mundt. Do you want that as an exhibit?
Senator McCarthy. If I may.
Senator Mundt. Without objection it will be entered as an exhibit
and marked accordingly.
(The document referred to above was marked as "Exhibit No. 42"
and will be found in the Appendix on p. 2987.)
You have concluded, have you, Mr. Cohn?
Mr. Cohn. I have nothing further.
Senator Mundt. Before we dismiss the witness and before we call
on the members of the committee, if they have any statements to
make, may the Chair ask Senator McCarthy whether he has any
other statement to make before he is dismissed.
Mr. Welch, you have no other questions, I take it ?
Senator McCarthy. The only statement I have to make, Mr. Chair-
man, is very brief. We have now finished this investigation. There
has been demonstrated I think considerable irritation and ill-feeling
at times here. Unless we can get the 4 Eepublicans and the 3 Demo-
crats working together in this task, which I think is important beyond
words, there isn't too much we can do. It will be completely impossi-
ble for me as the chairman to do an effective job of digging out the com-
munism, corruption, and treason that our staff has been working on
unless we do have finally at this late date some type of wholehearted
cooperation between my Democrat friends.
This is not going to be partisan, I assure you. I have been very,
very happy at the complete wholehearted cooperation of the Republi-
can members on the committee. I have asked them over the past year,
more than that, to take on very disagreeable jobs. In fact, I have
asked them to take on the most disagreeable jobs, the ones that I
didn't want to do myself. They have agreed to do that. They have
done those jobs well. I just sincerely hope that now my Democrat
friends and I can forget about the— I don't like to use the word "bitter-
ness," but I think it approaches that, that has been demonstrated
here and that we can all get down to doing this job.
Take, for example, Senator McClellan, the ranking Democrat mem-
ber, and I have worked very closely over a number of years, while he
was chairman and then while I was chairman. We seem to have lost
that. I think the fact that we lost that cooperation has been a great
damage to the country. I just hope that we can regain it.
All I can say, as far as I am concerned, is that I will lean over
backward; I will do everything humanly possible to work with our
Democrat friends so we can have a good going working committee
which I think we must have, Mr. Chairman, which I think we must
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 2977
have if this Congress is to do the job that we are supposed to do,
namely, act as the watchdog and let the American people know what is
happening. I think unless the American people know what is going
on, then the Republic does not have long to live — period.
Senator IMundt. Mr. AVelch, before we ask the witness to step down,
I am sure now you have concluded. I forgot to ask Mr. St. Clair,
but I assume that goes for the partnership.
Mr. Wei.ch. I have said those words, "that I rest."
Senator Mundt. I will give you a chance at the end to say a word
or two.
You may step down as a witness. Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will say that he will recognize each of
his colleagues, and Counsel Jenkins and Counsel Welch, if they care
to say something now in conclusion
Senator McCarthy. I will stay and hear the speeches.
Senator Mundt. Realizing we do not have a witness before us.
The Chair on the very first day of the hearing read a statement in
which a line or two appeared that I would like to reiterate now. I
said these hearings at best comprise an unpleasant business. Nothing
which has occurred since that date has changed my evaluation of the
kind of business in which we are engaged. I said the members of this
subcommittee are, however, resolved to accept our individual and col-
lective responsibilities and do our best to adjudicate and resolve this
unpleasant affair. I think that the members of the committee each ac-
cording to his own likes, abilities, and talents, has endeavored, con-
scientiously, to do that. The Chair would say that insofar as he is
concerned, he believes we have adduced the essential facts that are
essential and necessary in the writing of a report. The Chair believes
that insofar as he is concerned, the American audience, some 20 mil-
lion, we are told, on radio and television, nobody knows how many more
millions in the press, have followed these hearings more carefully and
more generally than any hearings ever before held on Capitol Hill.
I can assure our friends in the audience that they know what we
know, and that our report will be based on facts which have met the
eye or hit the ear of everybody interested in following the record. In-
sofar as the Chair is concerned, he wants for himself to sit down
quietly with the printed record, to search out certain statements and
facts to be pieced together along certain chains of evidence. When
those chains of evidence have been carefully analyzed, he believes that
he will be able to do his part in writing the report, wdiether happily we
can agree to have a one-package report or whether more realistically,
perhaps, we will find ourselves writing two reports or perhaps differ-
ent viewpoints from different individual members.
The Chair would like to say one thing about a phase of this hearing
which has been discussed a great deal, and that is the fact that we have
frequently diverted from what were originally the basic issues. That
there have been irrelevencies and diversions, nobody will question.
Most of those have evolved around significant disputes, wherein honest
men have a perfect right to differ, and wherein honest men have been
differing in the business of self-government since its very inception.
Those are differences involving the functions, the rights, and prerog-
atives of congressional conunittees, and the functions and prerog-
2978 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
atives of the Executive. Wliile it may appear to some that argu-
ments which have, on occasion, been heated, and sometimes unhappily
personal, are a reflection on our American system of government, the
Chair believes quite the reverse to be the truth. We settle in America
our arguments by an exchange of viewpoints. Sometimes heated,
sometimes unhappily personal. But we don't settle them as duelists
do, we don't settle them at pistol point, we don't settle them by brute
violence. We settle them by an appeal to the minds.
I think, too, we should recognize that we are fortunate in this country
that we can adjudicate a difference of this kind openly, publicly, even
though it takes a tremendous amount of time. In the Chair's opinion,
that is a demonstration that Americanism and freedom and self-gov-
ernment in this country are made of pretty sturdy stuff. I dissent
from those who feel that this is a disgraceful spectacle because people
disagree, and I join those who feel that this is a much better way to
settle a dispute than to do it behind closed doors and in star-chamber
sessions. One other thing, I think these hearings have helped make
clear to millions of Americans who haven't thought about the subject
since they went to high school, is that the currents of political power
in America are not one stream flowing as a mighty river.
Instead, we find them breaking up into little rivulets, and little
streams, which intertwine and twist and turn, sometimes joining,
going down some narrow gorge, where all agree, the lines are clearly
defined, and sometimes spreading in a broad valley where it is difficult
to note just where the lines of authority are or where the power
should be channelized. I think it has helped through these hearings
to discuss those issues for awhile, because as we bring to bear the col-
lective mind of America on those problems, we help to solidify the
forces of freedom. So perhaps when history is written, it will be the
irrelevancy and the diversions that prove to be the most constructive
phases of this controversy rather than the arguments devoted to some
specific point. It takes time, it takes traditions, it takes the force
of circumstance to define the How of political power down definitely
established channels.
I think we can all rejoice that we don't have it defined as clearly
as they have in Russia, where there is never any dispute, where the
executive is supreme, and the legislative is supine. I think we can
rejoice in the fact that we don't have it here as they have it unhappily
in France, where the executive is vacillating, and where the legislative
body has become capricious and too strong, and whimsically throws
executive officials out of po^er.
I think it is good we have this clash, this cleavage, which ultimately
results in the consolidation of freedom.
The Chair would like to express his appreciation to the members of
the counsel of all entities, for the very courteous and helpful way in
which they have conducted their heavy responsibilities. He would
like to express to his colleagues, who have borne with the chairman
through many, many long sessions, over 70, I think, 72 to be exact.
I appreciate their cooperation. I appreciate their assistance. I ex-
pect in a bipartisan government people are doing to disagree on
procedure once in awhile. I don't decry that, I applaud it. But we
nave gone along together here over a long, hard pull, and I want
to express my appreciation to those who have been joined with me in
this business.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2979
I would like to express iny appreciation to the members of the press,
to the radio and television people, especially the two national networks
that have carried these hearings in their entirety, to the people. I
think that is going to demoiis^rate for the future a course of action
which other committees ultimately are going to follow.
I said when we began that all of us in this committee room at this end
of the table were on the spot. I said the Chair was on the spot. He
has been on the spot thruughout the hearings. I said his committee
colleagues were on the spot. They have joined him in that unenviable
position. I have said to our friends in the press corps that they are
cm the spot. It is difficult, I know, to report back to the people who
read the papers the things that they have been seeing all day and hear-
ing all day.
I am sure this has made better reporters of you all, and the Chair
has no argument and no quarrel and no complaints about the fine
manner in which the press has reported these hearings.
I think it is clear to us all that television is a good chaperone for the
press at times, just as the press at times perhaps can perhaps be a
chaperone for television.
I thank you very much for your diligence. I thank you for your
cooperation. I join you in a sigh of relief that we have come to the
end of this unpleasant business.
Senator McClellan, I recognize you.
Senator McClellan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In much of what
you have said, I fully agree. 1 express, too, my appreciation to all of
those w^io have unfortunately been compelled to participate in these
proceedings, and who performed their duties by attending the hear-
ings and reporting them, by medium of press, radio, and television.
Mr. Chairman, I am compelled to say, however, that this has been
one of the most disagreeable, one of the most difficult public services
that it has ever been my duty to perform. I had no animosity to-
ward anyone, toward any individual, when these hearings began. I
think I can say without any reservation whatsoever that I hold no
animosity now toward any one involved in these proceedings. I did
say in the beginning, Mr. Chairman, in that brief statement that I
made when we opened these hearings, that the charges and the counter-
charges that gave rise to this controversy were of such a grave nature
as to make these proceedings mandatory.
I think that statement was true. I also said that the charges and
the accusations were so diametrically in conflict that, as I saw it then,
they could not possibly be reconciled.
I do not believe the testimony that has been given here over these
long weeks can now be, by any process of reasoning, reconciled.
I further stated at the beginning of the hearings, Mr. Chairman,
that we, the Democratic members, would wholeheartedly undertake to
cooperate with and assist the majority in making these hearings im-
partial, fair, and thorough, to the end that that which^was true might
be revealed and that which is false be exposed without regard to any of
the personalities that might be involved.
Mr. Chairman, I trust I have kept that pledge.
You, my colleagues on this committee, the personalities involved in
the controversy, this audience and above all the American people who
have witnessed this proceeding, may be my judges as to whether I have
2980 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
been sincere and conscientious and faithful in trying to perform that
trust.
I am compelled to say in conclusion, Mr. Chairman, that the series
of events, actions, and conduct that precipitated the ugly but serious
charges and countercharges that made these lengthy and unpleasant
public hearings mandatory, I think will be recognized and long remem-
bered as one of the most disgraceful episodes in the history of our
Government.
Simply to say that this series of events is regrettable is a gross un-
derstatement. They are deplorable and unpardonable. There is no
valid excuse or justification for this situation having occurred, and it
will now become our solemn duty, the duty of this committee, to under-
take to determine and fix the responsibility.
I think that is a part of our responsibility. We have a tremendous
amount of testimony here, much of it irrelevant, some of it competent,
but some of it goes directly to the issues involved.
In trying to determine or come to a conclusion and to a decision, I
shall undertake to be as judicial as my capacity will permit, to weigh
that which I think relevant and discard that which I consider to be
irrelevant.
Something has been said here this afternoon about cooperation of
the Democrats. Mr. Chairman, you can always have the cooperation
of this Democrat in anything that is right, and certainly you can have
it wholeheartedly to the full extent and limit of my energies and ca-
pacities when the sole purpose and the primary purpose of any action
is to ferret out Communists or to expose Communist infiltration.
I say that because I don't think I have ever been accused of not being
willing to face the test.
Mr. Chairman, it is easy to ask for cooperation, but the best way to
get it is to reciprocate. 1 recall when I begged this committee not to
take an action that would drive the Democrat members away from it.
I did it on principle, Mr. Chairman. I begged you not to silence the
voice of the Democrat members of this committee. Our voices were
silenced, and we left the committee.
These things occurred during our absence, and I let the public judge
in this closing hour whether any Democrat was responsible, as has been
intimated here, for what happened that, necessitated and brought
about these proceedings.
I trust that the American people will not judge these proceedings
as the best or as the regular proceedings of the United States Senate.
I do not think we have, altogether, lived up to the dignity and pres-
tige of this body in which I am honored and privileged to serve.
I think we could have conducted the hearings a little better, and I
Mnll take my share of any responsibility that falls upon us for that.
But I would hate for the country to think, the people of the Nation
to think, that this is a fair sample of the proceedings and the manner
of conducting proceedings in the highest lawmaking body in the world.
Mr. Chairman, I can only pledge that in the further duties we have
to perform here, I shall try to be as conscientious and as sincere and as
fair and impartial as I possibly can to arrive at a just decision and
the proper action to be taken thereon.
I thank you.
_ Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen, the Chair will be happy to recog-
nize you.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2981
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, this is a little like June week on
the college campus, when we utter our valedictories and say goodby
to all the amazing things that were a part of this legislative venture.
First of all to you, Mr. Chairman, I say you have done a magnificent
job under most trying circumstances, and I compliment you.
To our very distinguished counsel, from the Commonwealth of Ten-
nessee, I bestow a salute for the constructive, objective, and great job
you have done. I think you have rendered yeoman service to this
committee.
To my friend Mr. Boston, whose impish charm and wit always dis-
arms me somehow or other, may I say, Mr. Welch, that we have plowed
the long furrow.
There have been some rather interesting things about all this. It is
a little like a page out of O. Henry, I would say, that a simple charge
and countercharge should assemble a medley of w^itnesses here for
many, many weeks, ranging from the Secretary of the Army to one of
the humblest privates in that great institution.
It has evoked a great outpouring of mail. I have been excoriated,
I have been praised, I have been blamed, I have been vilified. To all
those who have not been answered — and there must be some 15,000
unanswered letters in my office now — I can only say they give testi-
mony, I think, to the vitality of the country under those circumstances.
It is a great privilege, I think, to walk into millions of American
homes with a hearing of this kind. It does confer an additional re-
sponsibility, I think, upon the Congress and upon every committee.
I have only one serious note to utter. This is no time for comment
on what has happened or on the findings or the judgment that is still
to be rendered. I think the most impressive thing, to me, about it all
is the unending stream of people who have honored us by their pres-
ence day after day and week after week.
I suppose the psychologists and experts who are learned in the
field of mass behavior have all the answers, but I come up with an
answer of my own as I have watched the attention of people here
day after day and have appraised so great a volume of mail that has
come to my attention. It just seems to me that probably the greatest
and telling impulse of life is that of self-preservation. Normally we
extend it only to that quality that makes us so tenacious about life
and carries us to any length to shield friends and family, but I do
believe that that primary instinct of self-preservation extends to the
preservation of country.
It is rather unconscious, as a matter of fact, on the part of people.
But it is the reason why there is such a tremendous interest in the
crusade against communism, disloyalty, and all the variants of those.
I presume if this crusade in the first instance had addressed itself
only to cold intellect and a bit of cynicim, it would have tottered and
failed long ago. But it addresses itself to a very decent instinct in
the people, and out of it all there comes this one conclusion: the
crusade against the sinister forces with which we have been contend-
ing for a long time must go on with renewed vigor in the interest
of the perpetuity of a free country.
May I say to the Dail}^ Worker and to its reporter who has been in
attendance, I fancy, every day since this began, there may have been
a moment of comfort and there may have been some transient glee as
they made headlines about the hearings, but that comfort and glee
2982 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
Avill be short-lived indeed as the crusade against communism and sub-
version and disloyalty goes on with greater vigor than ever before.
That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson, we will be glad to hear from
you.
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I intended to request the
Chair, I think he told me he would, to call an executive session at
his earliest convenience.
Senator Mundt. That is correct. The Chair has already announced
that. Pie has that and two other announcements to make after our
colleagues have concluded their statements.
Senator Jackson. I wanted to second that request, Mr. Chairman,
because there are a number of important questions that are as yet un-
resolved by these hearings, and I think that the executive session is
the appropriate place. I understand that will be held shortly.
Senator Mundt. Very shortly.
Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, I want to be very brief, and I
will be. I merely want to say this, that we cannot help be dismayed
at hearing the revelation of smallness and pettiness of the circum-
stances which have been described here during the past many days,
85 or 36, whatever days we have been here. But we cannot minimize
the grave and serious importance of the charges and countercharges
which gave birth to these hearings. Certainly our responsibility does
not end here, and certainly the American people have the right to ex-
pect that Ave take whatever action is necessary to correct the abuses
which have been shown here. I certainly shall do all in my power
toward this end. And I believe we have the grave responsibility to
demonstrate that, as a result of these hearings, we can improve on
that which has been wrong. And if we do nothing more than that,
we will have made a contribution to better government.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter, do you care to make a statement?
Senator Potter. Mr. Chairman, as the curtain goes down on the
hnal act of 36 days of hearings, I think there are two things that it
would be well for the American people to recognize. First, that this
IS not a typical congressional hearing. Even the structure and the
format is not typical. We have had outside attorneys brought in to
act as counsel for one of the principals, and for the committee.
The procedures, the rules, that we have adopted for this particular
hearing were unusual, and I doubt if they have ever been used in any
other type of congressional hearing.
I have been disturbed throughout the hearings to witness the per-
sonality clashes. They reflect upon the dignity of the Senate. I wish
to assure the American people that are watching that that is not
normal. Because of certain testimony some people may believe that
the Government is overrun with disloyal people. I feel sure that the
administration downtown and the committees of the Congress are all
working with a singleness of purpose to root out all persons that may
be disloyal or security risks.
I feel that there is no one committee, there is no one individual, that
carries tins fight alone; that the President and the members of the
executive branch are equally concerned about this problem.
I sincerely hope, however, that as a result of these hearings there will
be a greater degree of cooperation between the executive branch and the
SPECIAL mVESTIGATION 2983
legislative branch of our Government, in the work on this serious
problem of endeavoring to ferret out Communists.
When we get back to regular functions of our committee, I am sure
we can work together and the personality difficulties that have devel-
oped in the course of these hearings will be removed.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington, the Chair will be happy to
recognize you.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, the issues presented to this
committee in this controversy have produced directly conflicting evi-
dence. The record will have to be studied closely before a final deter-
mination can be reached.
I pledge that I will do my best to that end.
I regret this subcommittee has decided by a 4 to 3 vote to limit
the witnesses who were called. I believe there are other witnesses
who have important testimony bearing on this controversy who
should have been heard by this subcommittee. Because that letter
was read at the end of the hearings, I want to express apprecia-
tion to Mr. Welch in having the letter rea d. I have not been in
touch with Mr. Stevens since the 8th of March, directly or indirectly.
There is one slight error in it.
But it gives the facts, with that exception, as I know them. In
my opinion, however, these hearings have brought up a subject which
the American people will have to give very serious consideration to,
and that is the contention by a member of the legislative branch that
he has the right to solicit and that he will continue to solicit employees
in the executive branch of the Government secretly to bring to him
and his staff confidential documents.
I believe that this committee and the Senate of the United States
must consider that contention most carefully, because it goes to the
very heart of the fundamental theory of the separation of powers in
the Government of the United States. Although I entirely agree
with my distinguished colleague, Senator McClellan, that these have
been most distressing days, nevertheless a decision on that important
matter, if it comes soon, may have justified these hearings.
I want to thank all the people of the staff who have been so courteous
and gracious to me and my colleagues while these hearings have been
going on. Thank you.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak?
Senator Dworshak. I shall be very brief , Mr. Chairman.
I merely want to emphasize that the committee has had this unpleas-
ant task. I think now we should have no unnecessary delays in
reaching our final conclusions and a decision. But more important
than that, I want to appeal to the American people to be tolerant and
to be understanding. And while it is easy to be critical of the execu-
tive branch, the President and the Congress, because of failure to
do things that possibly should be done, I think that a helpful attitude,
and the support of the American people of their Government, the
executive and legislative branches, will accomplish a great deal in
reaching the goals of national defense as we live in these highly
critical days.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, the Chair would like to extend to you
the courtesy of saying anything that you might like to say at this time
as a final word.
2984 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Welch. That is a courtesy indeed, since I rate so little consider-
ation. I would like to say one or two things. First, I would like to
say a word about the man who sits on my^immediate right, Jim St.
Clair. He doesn't know I am going to say this. I simply couldn't
have touched the job that has been done here without his assistance,
and my debt to him is very large indeed. Once I had his youth, but
I did not, I tliink, have his equipment or his high promise. I must
thank my staff at the Pentagon, there are some of them, I think, who
are probably still there listening. I can't pass Colonel Murray on my
left, who has been of such help to me. To the press and the radio
and the television, I can only say you were kind to me, a stranger.
I came into the case proud of my retainer, and I leave ]n-oud of my
retainer. I came in with a high confidence in the Army and its Secre-
tary^ and in its department counselor. Far from diminishing, that
confidence has been doubled and trebled as I have sat here.
Would you, Mr. Chairman, bear a personal note? I alone, 1 alone
came into this room from deep obscurity. I, alone, will retire to ob-
scurity. As it folds about me, softly as I hope it does quicklv, the lady
who listened and is called Judith Linden Welch will hear from me a
long sigh of relief. I am sorry that this play had to take place in
the fretful lighting and the ominous roll of noises from Indochina
and around the world. It saddens me to think that my life has been
lived so largely either in wars or turmoil. I may say, as I have already
indicated, that I conld do with a little serenity. I allow myself to
hope that soon there will come a day when there will, in this lovely
land of ours, be more simple laughter.
Senator Mundt. The Chair would only like to add, Mr. Welch, if
you think you are returning to obscurity in Boston, you have over-
looked an enterprising American institution known as the Lecture
Bureau, which I am sure will be seeking your services.
As we began these hearings listening to the voice of a man from
Tennessee opening them, we shall conclude them with that same voice
now, with the exception that after the Chair has recognized our com-
mittee counsel, Ray Jenkins, who has done such a terrific job in an un-
paralleled capacity, wearing two hats in the same trial, the Chair
would like to state that after Mr. Jenkins has concluded, he has 3
announcements of some importance to make, and then we will adjourn.
Ray Jenkins, it is a pleasure to recognize you as the last of our
salutatorians.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, as my last official act as special counsel
for this subcommittee, I desire at this time— and I am sure I now have
unanimous consent of the chairman and all the members of this
subcommittee— to completely and forever divest myself of this con-
fidential communication with which we have lived so long and which
I confess, Mr. Chairman, has given me a sense of guilt by reason of
perhaps the atomic information that it contains.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will now accept this document from
you with the understanding that he will take it to the executive com-
mittee meeting tomorrow morning and determine where it goes from
there. I will assume responsibility for the next 24 hours.
Mr. Jenkins. Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have this oppor-
tunity to say a few words before leaving this microphone.
Together with those Avith whom I have worked so long I have looked
forward with much anticipation to the arrival of this magic and
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 2985
happy moment, the ending of these hearings. Now that it has arrived,
1 must in all sincerity say that the happiness of the moment is some-
what tinged by a feeling of sadness because it is not only the moment
of the ending of this controversy and these hearings — it is a moment
of goodbys and of farewells and of parting with friends and going
our respective ways.
It would be asking too much, INIr. Chairman and members of tlie
committee, of an inscrutable fate even to hope that the paths of all
of us will sometime cross again, but it will be easy and it will be
heartwarming to me from day to day and from month to month and
from year to year to recreate the scenes of this drama and of the
characters of its cast.
I want to publicly acknowledge the faithful and the loyal services
rendered to me by the members of my staff — ]\Ir. Collier, Mr. Horo-
vv'itz, Mr, Maner, and Mr. Prewitt.
As others have done at this closing moment, I want to affirm my high
estimate of the press and of the radio and of television in bringing
to the people of my country what I consider to be its finest lesson
in government and in the o])erations and functions of at least two of
the great branches of that Government.
Mr. Chairman, now for those of you whom we have served so long,
the members of this subcommittee, as their faces pass in review before
my mind's eye in time to come I will not look upon them or regard
them as members of the two great parties of this country, I will re-
gard them always as truly great Americans. I want to say here in all
sincerity and from the depths of my heart that they are to my mind —
and I am talking now to the American people, and in a moment of
sentiment may I name them — Senator Jackson from the State of
Washington, Senator Symington from Missouri, Senator McClellan
from way down South — you all know where he is from; the dis-
tinguished chairman from the great State of South Dakota, Senator
Dirksen of Illinois, Senator Potter of Michigan, and Senator Dwor-
shak of Idaho — they to my mind, and I am talking to the American
people, are 7 rocks of granite to whom the people in this country may
anchor all of their hopes, their aspirations, their ambitions, their
trust, and their faith, because I know that these 7 men are truly repre-
sentative of the 96 men who compose the greatest lawanaking body in
this world.
As long as the American electorate exercises its right of franchise,
bought at such a terrific price, which will be its right in the future
only by the exercise of eternal vigilance, and send to the Halls of the
Congress of this Nation and to the executiv3 departments of this
Nation men of the caliber of the seven men sitting to my right and to
my left, the foundations of this Government are strong and are safe,
and the perpetuity of this Nation is assured.
Finally, Mr, Chairman — and I apologize for taking so much time — -
may I say that if at some time down in Tennessee by some devious
reasoning or wishful thinking, I can beguile my own mind into the con-
viction that perhaps to some extent I have been of service to my coun-
try in my participation with this committee and in these hearings,
then for the many days and the many nights of labor and of work,
of doubts, of fears, and of anxiety, I shall feel compensated and repaid
a thousandfold.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
2986 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Mundt. I know that the Chair speaks for the entire meni'
bership of the committee, Mr. Jenkins, that we express to you and
to your hard-working associates our deep appreciation for the per-
sonal and financial sacrifice you have all made to come here to help
with this great task. We searched long, we searched faithfully, we
searched hard, we searched with complete unanimity as a committee,
to find a counsel to handle this unusual assignment. I am sure that
no member of this subcommittee has ever, even remotely, had any
reason to question our good luck and good judgment in selecting you
for this task.
I have 1 more assignment to give you, 1 more to give Colonel Murray,
1 announcement to make, and then we shall adjourn.
I ask you now as your last task as counsel for the committee, Mr.
Jenkins, before returning from a quick trip to Tennessee to meet with
us in an executive session to determine the problems of the report,
I ask you if you will notify the adjutant general of New York, General
Kelley, that we are releasing Mr. Rov Cohn from any further services
as far as appearance before this committee is concerned, and if Ad-
jutant General Kelley has to call upon his military services, he is
ready.
Colonel Murray, I think by now perhaps Private Schine has already
returned to the normal functions that he would have as a private in the
Army, but if not, I wish you would tell his commanding officer that he
also is divested of any responsibility as far as this committee is
concerned.
At 10:30 tomorrow morning in room 357, the Chair is calling an
executive meeting of the subcommittee.
Now having heard more than 2 million words of testimony and hav-
ing heard every pertinent witness who has requested to be heard, and
having heard every witness requested by any of the counsel to the
entities in this dispute, the Chair declares these hearings adjourned
sine die.
(Whereupon, at 6 : 32 p. m., the hearings were adjourned.)
APPENDIX
EXHIBITS
No. 42
Statements From Original Communist Sources on the Necessity of Penetrat-
ing THE Army and Military Establishments
"An absolutely essential prerequisite for this form of action [a direct attack
upon the bourgeois state] is intensified revolutionary work in the army and the
navy." — Program of the Communist International Together icith Its Constitu-
tion, Workers Library Publishers, New York 1936.
"In the most euliahteued and free countries * * * it is especially necessary
to carry on unlawful work in the army, navy, and police." — Theses and Statutes
of the Third (Communist) International, a booklet reprinted by the United
Communist Party of America.
"The Communist International must devote itself especially to * * * organ-
ized work in the army and navy." — Program of the Cotnmunist International
Together tcith Its Constitution, Workers Library Publishers, New York, 1936.
"A persistent and systematic propaganda and agitation is necessary in the
army, where Communist groups should be formed in every military organization.
Wherever, owing to repressive legislation, agitation becomes impossible, it is
necessary to carry on such agitation illegally." — Theses and Statutes of the
Third {Communist) International, a booklet reprinted by the United Communist
Party of America.
"The Communist Party of America will organize party nuclei wherever there
are proletarians or semi-proletarians. These nuclei will be organized in trade
and industrial unions, in factory committees, in working class educational or
social organizations, in government institutions, in the army and navy, and
in the organizations of the agricultural laborers, tenant farmers, small farmers,
(itc"— Constitution and Program of the Communist Party of America, published
by the Communist Party of America, 1921.
"The Communist Party of America will carry on a systematic agitation in the
American army and navy * * *" — Constitution and Program of^ the Communist
Party of America, published by the Communist Party of America, 1921.
"The Commuuisis of all countries must increase their work in the capitalist
armies."— Fac/o/s Governing Our Tactical Line, an article from The Com-
munist, August 1931.
"Let us take root in the factories * * * let us penetrate into * * * the army,
into the navy."— /)«//// Worker, January 24, 1933, page 4.
"Only the Soviet power is capal)Ie of releasing the army from its position of
su!)ordination to bourgeois command and of converting it from an instrument
of oppression of the people, which it is under the bourgeois order, into an instru-
ment for the liberation of the people from the yoke of the bourgeoisie, both
native and toveiiAn."— Foundations of Leninism, by Joseph Stalin, a booklet
published by the international l'ul»lishers, New York, 1934.
"In fighting against war, the Communists must prepare even now for the
transformation of the imierialist war into civil war, concentrate their forces in
each country, at the vital parts of the tvar machine of imperialism."— ^'/le.ses
and Decisions of the Thirteenth Plenum of the Executive Committee of the
Communist International — December 1933, published by Workers Library Pub-
lishers, New York, March 1934.
"Revolutionary work in the army must be linked up with the general revolu-
tionary movement of the masses of the proletariat and poor peasantry." — Resolu-
tion of the Sixth World Congress of the Communist International, published by
Workers Lil>rary Puhlishers. New York, 19.34.
2987
INDEX
Page
Adams, John G 2934-2941, 2944-2947, 2950-2959
Alaskan projects 2974
Albany, N. Y 29j^0
American Republic 29 i 7
Armed Services Coiiiiiiittee (S'^iiiite) 2967
Army (United States) 292C, 2954, 2950, 2081, 2989, 2973, 2974, 2986, 2987
Atomic bomb plants 2974
Barslaag, Karl 2961, 2962
Benton 29.j4
Blattenberger, Mr 29.j4
Boston, Mr 2981
Boston, Mass 29_4
Brownell, Mr 29ul
Buckley. Daniel G 2942
Camp Dix 2928
Capehart committee -9 '^
Capitol Hill 2977
Capitol Police 2923, 29^48
Carr, Francis P 2928,
2930, 2934, 2937, 2940-2942, 2944, 2946, 2949-2952, 2957, 2959, 2960
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 2974
Chicago, 111 2944
CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) 2974
Clifford, Clark 2966, 2967, 2969, 2971, 2972
Cohn, Roy M 2926-2931, 2934-2942, 2944-2949, 2951-2965, 2972, 29S6
Collier, Mr 2985
Committee on the Armed Services (Senate) 296<
Commonwealth of Tennessee 2981
Communist infiltration of the Army 2926, 2954, 2955
Communist infiltration of atomic bomb plants 2974
Communist infiltration of CIA 2974
Communist infiltration of hydrogen bomb plants .-_ 2974
Communist International 2'^§'7
Communist leadership school 2974
Communist Party ~?"5'
2933-2934, 2936, 2939, 2946, 2953, 2954, 2956, 2957, 2973-2976, 29S0,
2983, 2987.
Communist Party of America 2987
Communist Party constitution 2976
Communist Party statutes 29^8
Communist prison camps ^''P
Communist publications 2970
Communists 1 2926, 2932-2934, 2930,
2939, 2946, 2953, 2954, 2956, 2957, 2959, 2973-2976, 2980, 2983, 2987
Communists in the Army 2926, 2954, 2955
Communists in defense plants 2973
Congress of the United States 2947, 2971, 2977, 2981-2983, 2985
Constitution of the Communist Party 2976
Constitution and program of the Communisht Party of America 2987
Counselor to the Army 2934-2941, 2944-2947, 2950-2959
Daily Worker 2975, 2981, 2987
Defense Secretary 2967
Department of the Army 2926, 2954, 2956, 1961, 2969, 2973, 2974, 2986, 2987
Dirksen, Senator 2924, 2951, 2970, 2971, 2985
Driscoll, Mrs. Mary 2928, 2943, 2945, 2949
n INDEX
Page
Dworshak, Senator 2085
Europe 2971
Executive committee of tlie Communist International 2987
Factors Governing Our Tactical Line 2987
Far East 2955
FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) 2931,2932
FBI document 2931, 2932
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 2931,2932
First Army Loyalty Board 2956
First World War 2973
Foley Square (New York City) 2940,2941,2946
Fort Monmouth 2'.'.?,e,, 2937, 2944, 2946, 2953, 2959
Foundations of Leninism 2987
Freedom Foundation 2971
Gasner's Restaurant (New York City) 2941,2958
Government Printing OiRce 2954
Henry, O 2981
Hiss, Alger 2932
Horowitz, Mr 2985
Hotel Waldorf 2944, 2961-2963
Hydrogen bomh plants 2974
International Publishers 2987
Jackson, Senator 2970, 2985
Kelley, General 2986
Lawton, General 2934-2941, 2944, 2958-2960
Lectui-e Bureau 2984
Lincoln Day 2955
Lenin 2987
Loyalty board 2953, 2955, 2957, 2973
Loyalty board (First Army) 2956
Lucas, Jack 2964
Maner, Mr 2985
Marshfield, Wis 2952
McCarthy, Senator Joe, testimony of 2924-2986
McCarthy, IMrs. Jeannie 2926, 2952, 2954
McClellan, Senator 2924, 2928, 2937, 2976, 2983, 2985
Miller, Steve 2952
Monitored phone calls 2964, 2965, 2967, 2972
Murray, Colonel 2984, 2986
New York City 2028, 2034, 2040, 2941, 2944, 2946, 2970, 2986, 2987
"Official Communist Party Line on McCarthy" (chart) 2975
Pearson, Drew 2951
Pentagon 2967, 2974, 2984
Penthouse of the Waldorf 2963
Peress case 2956, 2973
Potter, Senator 2924, 2972, 2985
President of the United States 2037, 2953, 2965, 2982, 2983
Prewitt, Mr 2985
Program of the Communist International, together with its constitution 2957
Quantico, Va 2966
Radar laboratories 2939, 2953, 2956, 2959
Reber, General 2927, 2971
Republican Secretary of the Army 2968
Republicans 2068, 2976
Ridgway, Gen. Matthew B 2970
Rogers, Bill 2951
Russia 2978
Schine, G. David 2024-2928, 2900, 2962-29G4, 2971, 2986
Schine, Mr. Meyer 2926
Schine, Mrs. Meyer 2926
Schine apartment 2026
Schine family 2926
Secretary of the Army 2024-2927, 2933, 2035, 2936, 2938-2940,
2948, 2049, 2953, 2955, 2957, 2960, 29G2-2970, 2972, 2973, 2983, 2984
Secretary of Defense 2967
INDEX in
PaKe
Senate Armed Services Coimnittee 2967
Senate Resolution 40 2942
Senate of the United States 2927, 2934, 2951, 2975, 2980, 2982
Sixth World Congress (Communist International) 2987
South Dakota sausage 2954
Soviet power 2987
Stalin, Josef 2987
Statutes of the Communist Party 2976
Stevens, Robert T 2924-2927, 2933, 2935, 2930, 2938-2940, 2948,
2949, 2953, 2955, 2957, 2960, 2962 2970, 2972, 2973, 2981, 2983, 2984
Stevens' son 2927
Symington, Senator 29GG, 2970, 2971, 2985
Theses and Statutes of the Third Communist Internatir)nal 2987
Third Communist International 2987
Thirteenth Plenum (Theses and Decisions) 2987
Transport 2927
Truman, President 2937, 2953
Truman loyalty board 2953
TV broadcast of hearinjis 2973
Tydiugs, Senator 2930, 2954
Tydings hearings 2930
United Communist Party of America 2987
United States Army 2926, 2954, 295G, 2961, 2969, 2973, 2974, 2986, 2987
United States Con.trre?'^ 2947,2971,2977,2981-2983,2985
United States Government Printing Office 2954
United States Secretary of Defense 2967
United States President 2937, 2953, 2965, 2982, 2983
United States Senate 2927, 2934, 2951, 2975, 2980, 2982
Valley Forge, Pa 2971
Waldorf Hotel 2044, 2961, 2962, 2963
Washington, D. C 2947
Washington's Birthday 2970
Welch, Judith Linden 29S4
White, Harry Dexter 2932
White House 2974
Wisconsin cheese 2954
Workers Library Publishers (New York City) 2987
World War I 2973
Zwicker, General 2956, 2970, 2971
O
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11