10924 withheld and not delivered either to Nationalist China, Formosa, or Southern Korea. Mr. McCARTHY. I thank the Sena- tor for his remarks. The public will never be told so long as committees like the Tydings-McMahon committee are as- signed to the job of digging out the facts. I was tremendously disturbed, surprised, and disappointed by what I saw and heard on the floor of the Senate last Thursday. The task of digging out Communists, traitors, and saboteurs should not be the task of any political party. It should not be the task of either the Republicans or the Demociats. It is a job for all Americans. From the moral support, the letters, and encour- agement which I have received from Democrats throughout the country it seems to me that those loyal Democrats should have deserved something better than what we sew on the floor of the Senate last week I thought perhaps that at least one Democratic Senator— at least one—would stand up and be counted and say, “I am not going to put myself into the Tydings-McMahon-Mor- gan group.” Iwas very happy to see that some Democratic Senators at least did not have the stomach to come here and take part in what went on. We saw a most unfortunate spectacle last weck— unfortunate not only for the Democratic Party, but for the Nation, For the first time we saw the Democratic Party line up solidly and effectively label itself as the party of betrayal and the party that protects Communists in Government. I am sure the American people will take note of that. That was not done by the Republican Party. It was done by no one except the Democratic Party itself. Isay that does not represent the thinking and feeling of the vast number of loyal long- time Democrats throughout the country. I may be getting away from the Sen- ator’s question, but I thought that fact should be made clear. For example, I do not believe the story will ever be told why the South Koreans, when this war start- ed, had not been given a single tank, a single antitank gun, or a single airplane, except some old AT-6’s. The story will never be told why they had not been given any help after Congress, following considerable discussion, had decided that it was in the interest of this country to defend South Korea. I do not think it will ever be explained why American soldiers had to go in there literally with bare hands to do a job which they would not have had to do had not Acheson and his crowd in the State Department sabo- taged what we attempted to do. The Congress decided that we should give South Korea some of the planes, tanks, and guns, because it was in our interest to do so. However, the State Depart- ment and the Commerce Department said, “No, not 1 cent of it will pass.” Mr. MUNDT. Would the Senator agree that if that had happened only in South Korea, we could charitably charge it off to the lack of experience of per- haps good-intentioned but bungling men who were not fit for their jobs? How- ever, when it follows in close sequence and exact replica what happened in For- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE mosa, which also followed in close se- quence and exact replica what happened in Nationalist China, the American pub- lic cannot help but conclude that some- one planned it that way. Whether it was planned by men of poor judgment, whether it was planned by men of stub- born mind, or whether it was planned by men of disloyal purposes, it seems to me the American public has a right to know why they planned it. They have a right to know because one of the results is a bloody war in far-off Korea, which we must now win in order to save the world from communism Mr McCARTHY. I agree with the Senator wholeheartedly. It was not merely the one case of Korea, but all of that area of the world. Our batting average in Asia 1s zero. The batting averaze of the Soviet Union 1s 1.000 per- cent. Mr MALONE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McCARTHY. I am glad to yield to the Senator from Nevada. A PATTERN Of POLICIES TIES STATE AND COM MERCE DEPARTMENTS TOGETHER Mr MALONE. The delay in the ship- ments of gasoline to Nationalist China was the subject of a resolution intro- duced by the junior Sonator from Ne- vada The purpose of the resolution was to provide for an investigation of the Commerce Department and certain ersons in the employ of the Depart- ment who apparently were directly re- sponsi)le for the delay. Mr. Liebermann, whose name is now Mr. Lee—-and who, incidentally, although on sick leave, still is the Director of the Far Eastern Division of the Department of Commerce when there was a 3-to-6- month delay ir the gas shipments to Na- tionalist China during the crucial 1948 period. The funds for 125,000 barrels of gas and other supplies had been made available by Congress. The delay was so protracted during this period that General MacArthur, out of his meager supphes of gas in 1948, furnished Chiang Kai-shek gas—while for one reason or another they were holding it up in the Department of Commerce. One of the reasons was that they wanted the de- tailed size of the gas storage tanks in China, the number of troops, number of planes, and so forth, all information which the Reds wanted but which was not needed in order to make it possible to ship gasoline in accordance with the congressional act. Mr, Gladieux, who occupies a high po- sition in the Department of Commerce, appeared before our committee in con- nection with the Lee—Liebermann— case and endeavored to support his ac- tions in China shipments. After the junior Senator from Nevada made his statement before the commit- tee, Mr. Sawyer discharged Mr. Reming- ton and Mr. Lee. Mr, Remington has since been indicted by the grand jury. Mr. Lee is still hanging on. Mr. McCARTHY. Let me correct the Senator. Mr. Sawyer did not discharge Mr. Lee, Mr. Sawyer asked Mr. Lee to resign, Mr, MALONE, That is correct. JULY 25 Mr. McCARTHY. And Mr. Lee told Mr. Sawyer to go to hell. Mr, MALONE. I accept the correc- tion: but he is on sick leave now. We have made progress. What I wanted to say was that the junior Senator from Nevada drew a pat- tern ot action before the Subcommittee of the Committee on Interstate and For- eign Commerce, and the pattern is clear, The Lattimore letter fitted in, ramely, that we must lose China and lose Korea. Then we proceeded to lose them through another department, at least it could he called an assist. Wherever we find one of these people, it seems to be like a hill of potatoes: If we get one, we get three or four or five others in the same depart- ment, all cooperating and supporting and recommending each other. Further, Mr. President, I ask the jJun- for Senator from Wisconsin, would he believe that the evidence of Mr. Gladieux in violently defending Mr. Lee and Mr. Remington and others under suspicion fits him to be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce? Mr. McCARTHY. I should say that in the eyes of the present administra- tion, apparently, yes. In my eyes, no. Iam sure the Senator does not think so. Mr. MALONE. If the Senator will yield further, I understand he was slated to be Assistant Secretary of the Depart- ment of Commerce until this hearing was held, but the eppointment is tempo- rarily delayed now until the fire dies down, if it does die down; but the junior Senator from Nevada has no idea of let- ting 1t die down. He is simply correlat- ing further evidence. The hearing is, however, stalled in a democratically controlled committee. Mr. McCARTHY. The junior Senator from Nevada performed a tremendous service for the country when he exposed Michael Lec in the Department of Com- merce. In further answer to the question which the Senator from South Dakota asked in regard to Remington, I wish to call the attention of the Senator to the fact that Remington was found to be O. K. not only by the Seth Richardson loyalty board, but the Tydings-McMahon committee found that there was no evi- dence of disloyalty, no evidence that he was a Communist, and no evidence that he was a pro-Communist. I think that should be clear. The Tydings-McMahon committee also found, insofar as this individual, whose FBI file I have here, is concerned, that there was no evidence of disloyalty, no evidence that he is a Communist—lis- ten to this—no evidence that he is a Communist, no evidence that he is a pro- Communist, even though we have a com- plete FBI report showing that he was a member of the Communist Party, not only in this country—this man was born in Moscow—but that he was a member of the Communist Party in Europe; that he admitted this to the FBI agent whom he considered to be a fellow Communist at the time the FBI agent was working under cover as a member of the Com- munist Party,
1950 It was found by the McMahon-Tydings committee that there was no evidence that this man was a Communist, no evi- dence that he was a pro-Communist, no evidence of disloyalty. They did not single the cases out separately, but took the whole 81 as one. I thought the Senator would be inter- ested in knowing that even though a grand jury has indicted a man for per- jury in connection with his communistic activities, the report which was prepared after the indictment still says that there is no evidence of his being a Communist or a pro-Communist. Mr. MALONE, Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McCARTHY. I yield. Mr. MALONE. Is the Senator aware of the fact that Mr. Gladieux, of the De- partment of Commerce, testified before the Committee on Appropriations of the House, I believe in April of this year, that there were 28 known dangerous risks in the Department of Commerce? Mr. McCARTHY. I am sorry; I did not catch the question. Mr. MALONE. Is the Senator aware of the fact that Mr. Gladieux, who was formerly considered as material to be ap- pointed as Assistant Secretary of Com- merce, testified before the appropriations subcommittee of the House—I believe in April 1950—that there are 28 known dan- gerous security risks in the Department of Commerce? Mr. McCARTHY. Iam aware of that. But let me say that the Department of Commerce cannot as easily get rid of those risks as can the State Department. The State Department is covered by the McCarran rider, which gave the Secre- tary of State the right to discharge those risks instanter. The Secretary of Com- merce, the Senator will recall, asked Michael Lee to resign, and Lee thumbed his nose at him. In fairness to the Sec- retary of Commerce, I should say he did not have the complete, unlimited power which the Secretary of State had. But I am aware of the fact that we do have those bad risks in the Department. Those risks, I understand, all had for- merly gotten loyalty board clearance. Mr. MALONE. That is correct. At least Mr. Lee had a clearance from the board, and I understand Mr, Remington had also. As I recall Mr. Alger Hiss also had clearances from the controlled loyalty boards—he has since been found guilty by a jury. The Senator is perfectly aware of the fact—or is he?—that whatever the Con- gress may do, the State Department and the Department of Commerce, working together can defeat, the Department of Commerce being the department which handles the shipments and the final dis- position of materials which are pur- chased by the money appropriated by Congress. Mr. McCARTHY. Not only can, but have done so. Mr. President, I should like now to read an article which may sound un- usual at first. It is in high praise of the Tydings-McMahon committee. I should like to read it into the Rrcorp, It says: Something very unusual but not unwel- come occurred last week in the Senate. The aw mere oon CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE sworn testimony of a professional stool- pigeon was discredited, rejected, and re- pudiated by the formal actions of a Senate subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Rela- tions Committee and of the Senate as a whole. I may say, before reading it, that this article deals with the committee’s treat- ment of Mr. Budenz. It praises the com- mittee to the skies. I think that before completing reading it I should mention the fact that I am reading from the Daily Worker, the official Communist publication. I think it is well that some- one is saying something good about the McMahon-Tydings committee, so I am going to read portions of this article into the Recorp. It proceeds: Interest grows, of course, when one realizes that the professional stool pigeon was Louis Francis Budenz, whose eager lies have been so helpful to the Justice Department in its drive against Communists and progressives. It can he seen his testimony hurt. One of the reasons why I am putting this into the Rrcorp is that I want the Sen- ate to compare the Daily Worker's lan- guage used in condemning Mr. Budenz with the language of the report of the committee. Pxosecutor McGohe}y relied heavily on the tortuous fabrications of Budenz in his case against the 11 Communist leaders. Judge Medina took pains that the jury should give it great weight. In the opinion of newsmen covering the trial, the testimony of Budengz ‘was the lever by which the prosecution pried &@ guilty verdict from the jury. It was the more or less unsupported word of Budenz which brought a jail sentence for Harold Christoffel, the Milwaukee labor leader. And during the last couple of years, few noncitizens have been ordered deported for their political views without the gloat- ing participation of Louis Francis Budenz. The article proceeds to point out that the Government would have been unsuc- cessful in deporting or convicting Com- munists if it had not been for Louis Francis Budenz. Then they point out that the com- mittee has done a tremendous service to the country in finally taking care of this man Budenz so that his testimony cannot be used in the future to convict other equally dangerous Communists, They apparently think the committee has done a brilliant job in applying the smear brush to Budenz so thoroughly that never again can his testimony be used to deport other dangerous Commu- nists as it has been deported in the past. I recommend this Daily Worker article for the reading of Senators at the same time they read the committee report. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- scent that the entire article be printed in the ConcresstonaL Recorp, at the end of my remarks. I trust it may be the last time I will ask that @ Daily Worker article be inserted in the Recorp. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp. (See exhibit 2.) Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, I wish to have placed in the REcorp a number of editorials, as follows: . An editorial from the Appleton Post- Crescent entitled “So Here Is How It Stands,” under date of July 22, 1950; an editorial entitled “The Report Nobody Believes,” from the Washington Times- 10925 Herald of July 19, 1950; an editorial en- titled “Green Lights for the Reds” from the Shreveport Times of July 19, 1950; an editorial entitled “A Shameful Per- formance,” from the Los Angeles Exam- iner; an editorial entitled “Whitewash, Pitch in Odd Mixture,” from the Dallas Morning News of July 19, 1950; an edi- torial from the St. Louis Globe Democrat of July 19, 1950, entitled “Convenient Whitewash.” Another editorial entitled “ ‘White- wash’ of Red Charges,” from the Cincin- nati Enquirer of July 21, 1950; an editori- al from the Wheeling Intelligencer of July 19, 1950, entitled ‘Buckets of White- wash”; an editorial entitled “The White- wash,” published in the Illinois State Journal of July 21, 1950, an editorial from a Dallas, Tex., newspaper whose name I do not have, entitled “No Mood To Forget”; an editorial “Owen Latti- more, Self-Revealed,” from the Arizona Daily Star of July 18, 1950, an editorial entitled “Smellier and Smellier,” from the Indianapolis Times of July 30, 1950. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that the editorials may be printed in the body of the Recorp at the conclu- sion of my remarks. There being no objection, the editorials were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, (See exhibit 3.) Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent to have printed in the CONGRESSIONAL ReEcorD an editorial from Life magazine entitled “Johnson or Acheson.” I am very happy to insert this editorial from Life magazine because of its indication that the men controlling the editorial policy of Life are big enough to admit mistakes and change. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REcorp. (See exhibit 4.) . Mr. McCARTHY. Myr. President, I also have in my hand an article from the July 17, 1950, issue of Time magazine. The article is entitled “The United States Tragedy in Formosa,” and is written by John Osborne, Time-Life senior correspondent in the Far East. Much as I hate to take the Senate's time, I think this article is important enough to read into the Recorp. It is not very lengthy but is extremely im- portant. Here is a magazine which cer- tainly has not been considered friendly to the efforts to remove the Communists from government, a magazine which certainly has not been friendly toward our attempt to expose what Acheson and his clique have been doing in the Far East. That, I believe, makes this article doubly significant. I should like to read it into the Rrcorp. It will take me but a few moments to do so. I read as fol- lows: John Osborne, Time-Life senior corre- spondent in the Far East, visited the For- mosan capital of Taipei last week, cabled: “This capital teems with testaments to the tragic miscalculations and near-fatal results of United States policy toward the Chinese Nationalists and Formosa. The visible, jar- ring fact is that the United States has cre- ated a situation which now makes it weil- nigh impossible to sustain any effective po- sition whatever on and toward Formosa. If the miscalculations of the State Department
10926 are retrieved, it will be only because For- mosa's Nationalists, in their extremity, are able and willing to make retrieval possible. “The full import of the United States Btate Department's attitude toward the Chi- nese Nationalists in recent months is mens- urable only in terms of the Nationalists’ political position on Formosa. If this posi- tion was understood by the State Depart- ment, the State Department stands convict- ed of the deliberate sabotage of the Chinese government; if this position was not under- stood, the State Department stands con- victed of avoidable ignorance. “Blind and stubborn. On Formosa, as in every other part of Asia, United States pro- nmouncements are read with extraordinary attention, they eventually reach even the tl- literate masses. And the State Department has blindly and stubbornly insisted on the maximum distribution of offictal American statements that were bound to undermine the Formosans’ confidence in thelr govern- ment.” Listen to this, Senators: “On more than one occasion, Formosa’s Nationalists have sharply and justifiably re- minded the puny United States representa- tion here that the statements of Secretary of State Dean Acheson and other Washington spokesmen constituted a direct attack on & government which was, after all, host to the very Americans in charge of disseminating these statements throughout Formosa “The results of this almost incredible sit- uation have not been catastrophic for two reasons: (1) Chiang Kal-shok’s present gov- ernment 1s definitely better in performance and public relations than any Chinese Na- tionalist Government since the mid-1930’s; (2) @ bumper rice crop this year has made rural Formosans feel pretty good and al- layed discontent that might otherwise have been stimulated by American statements. “Crowning irony. The crowning lrony came this weck when Nationalist Spokesman Shen Chang-huan felt constrained to dispel at least part of the heavy fog surrounding President Truman's statement on Formosa. Baid Shen in a statement to the Chinese press: “I believe the United States has no territorial ambitions on Formosa"’ It was a gstatement that any local United States spokesman might have been expected to make, but of course none did. Any local United States diplomat who said anything reassuring to the Chinese Government would have expected to lose his job.” Let me repeat that, Mr. President: “Any local United States diplomat who sald anything reassuring to the Chinese Gov- ernment would have expected to lose his job. “It makes no sense for the United States to reverse its concept of Formosa's strategic importance and at the same time cling stubbornly to the old, down-the-nose politi- cal attitude toward Formosa’s Nationalist Government. Yet so far as I can judge here, this is precisely what the United States State Department is undertaking to do. I can state as fact that no instructions to modify or alter in any way our political, diplomatic, and military relations with the government of this island have been received by United States representatives here ” Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McCARTHY. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. Ishould like to call the Senator's attention to the Conarzs- SIONAL Record of yesterday, where there appears, starting on the first page, a copy of a letter which I addressed to the President of the United States under date of July 13 and a copy of his reply of acknowledgment of July 14, In my CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE letter I pointed out that I felt that with the changed situation the Government of the United States should be repre- sented at Taipei, which is the temporary capital of the Republic of China, by an Ambassador rather than the present consul general who is there. I respect- fully suggested to the President that one possibility, as an Ambassador, and a man who is well acquainted with that area of the world and with the Soviet aspira- tions in that area of the world, was Mr. Angus Ward, who was held a prisoner by the Communists at Mukden for a considerable period of time. In any event, of course, the one who {fs selected will be chosen by the President of the United States himself. However, certainly there is on the island of Formosa—which I visited last November and December—the largest force of non-Communist combatant troops in that area of the world. I want to call the Senator’s attention to the fact—although I am sure he already knows it—that the first member nation of the United Nations to respond whole- heartedly to the appeal for aid in meet- ing this Communist aggression was the Republic of China, located on Formosa, which offered some three divisions of 30,000 men and 20 C-46 planes. That Government was not only the only mem- ber of the Security Council, aside from the Government of the United States, to offer ground forces, but until quite re- cently it was the only member of the United Nations to offer any ground forces, and up to this very moment it is the member of the United Nations which has offered the largest number of ground forces, oter than the United States of America, I also wish to call to the attention of the Senator from Wisconsin, or at least to remind him of the fact, that had it not been for the vote of the representa- tive of the Republic of China in the Security Council on the second and the third resolutions, which require, by virtue of the Charter of the United Nations, seven votes in order to carry, the second and the third resolutions would not have been adopted, or at least, would not have been adopted with- out some additional delay, which might have resulted in the overrunning of all Korea. I think the Senator has made a very good point. This Government does have some responsibility in this matter. Even as we meet here today, as I pointed out yesterday, the island of Quemoy, othcr- wise known as Kinmen, is about to come under amphibious assault. Heretofore it was thought that perhaps the Republic of China was foreclosed from reinforc- ing that island. However, it is my opin- jon that that is not the case, but that the Government of the Republic of China is free to give such reinforcement to the island of Quemoy or Kinmen as is necessary. Certainly it would be a great mistake, in my judgment, to permit the island of Quemoy to fall to the Chinese Com- munists; because if it does fall to them it will be a stepping stone to the island of Formosa. JULY 25 I wish to say now—and I intend to take it up in both the Armed Services Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee—that I do not believe we should get caught in Formosa as we were in Korea. I believe that the Govern- ment of the United States should have in Korea today a commission finding out what additional ammunition and what additional artillery and what additional tank equipment they need, so that if there is an assault against the island of Formosa, the Chinese forces there—some 600,000 men, under the very able leader- ship of Gen. Sun Leh Jen, a graduate of Virginia Military Institute, and a very able Jeader, just as Gen. Hu Lien, on the island of Kinmen, is a very competent commander—will have the necessary material with which to defend them- selves. They are willing to defend the free way of life, as against communism, having had considerable experience with what communism means when it over- runs a country. So I do not believe we should sit back and wait until Formosa itself is under amphibious assault before we get the ammunition and the other materials which we need to get to that island. Mr McCARTHY. I think the Senator from California will agree with me that if the Communists are successful in over- running Kinmen, one of the reasons why they will be successful is the existing order which the President of the United States gave to the Seventh Fleet, which provided that they would protect the mainland and its approaches from any air attacks by Chiang Kai-shek. I am sure the Senator is aware of the fact that until that order went into effect, Chiang Kai-shek had been effectively bombing the attempted concentration of small boats in preparation for the inva- sion of Kinmen. However, since that order has been in effect, Chiang Kai- shek’s air force has not been able to attempt to break up the marshaling of troops on the mainland and the concen- tration of small shipping in preparation for the invasion of Kinmen. Iam sure the Senator will agree with me that that order certainly should be given close scrutiny by the President of the United States at this time. Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I may say to the Senator that I think that undoubtedly 1s true; and that order does make more difficult the defense of Kin- men Island or the defense of Formosa itself, by permitting the accumulation of amphibious craft to carry an invading force to either of those islands. However, I think the record should be clear that, as I understand, there is no restraint on the Government of the Republic of China in regard to rein- forcing the island of Kinmen, which ap- parently is soon to come under attack; at least, so far as movements from For- mosa to Kinmen Island are concerned, they will not be interfered with by the United States Seventh Fleet. Mr. McCARTHY. I understand that; but I am sure the Senator will agree with me that the mere sending of troops to Kinmen, coupled with a denial of the right to bomb and break up the concen- tration of Communist forces along the
1950 shore, is of but little help to the Govern- ment of the Republic of China. So long as we prevent Chiang’s forces from bomb. ing the concentration of Communist forces, which apparently are prepared or are preparing to invade that island, we are performing a great service for and are giving great help to the Commu-~ nists. So long as we say that Formosa is of strategic importance and that we must protect it—which means, of course, that we must protect it with the Seventh Fleet and perhaps air forces—and if there is an attempted invasion of For- mosa, many of our boys will die because Chiang Kai-shek has been prevented by us from using his air force to bomb and break up the Communist forces which are preparing to invade Formosa. I am sure the Senator from California will agree with me in regard to that point. Mr. KNOWLAND. I agree; and I am sure that any order preventing the Re- public of China from sending its air force to bomb the Communust forces which are preparing to invade Kinmen or Formosa should be canceled. I think that some conditions which previously prevailed in connection with the invasion of South Korea, made 1t desirable that another front not be opened up, in connection with China. However, certainly the ac- tion to be taken against invading fleets should be left to the discretion of the Government of China, which temporarily is located on the island of Formosa. Mr. McCARTHY,. I thank the Sena- tor very much. Mr. President, continuing with the article from which I was reading—— Mr McFARLAND, Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McCARTHY. I am glad to yield. Mr. McFARLAND. Mr. President, we have been rather lenient, and have not objected to the making of speeches by other Senators in coénnection with the matter the Senator from Wisconsin is discussing. We have not objected to interruptions, Mr. President, I am going to have to demand the regular order from now on, and I simply wish to give that notice. Mr McCARTHY I thank the Sena- tor, and appreciate the fact that he has been patient up to this time. Mr. President, I read further from the article entitled ‘“‘The United States Trag- edy in Formosa”’: The prevailing American attitude is that any help to Formosa, military or economic (beyond the present ECA program), would be o mistake because it would build up the Nationalist Government, again identify the United States Government with it, and there- by contribute to the Nationalist return to the mainland so ardently opposed by our State Department All here, including the responsible Chinese I have so far seen, realize that this is no time to rake up the past for recriminations’ sake. But all here also realize that this past has created probleme to be dealt with now—and to be dealt with by United States officials whose attitudes and capacities, for the most part, can only be measured by the recent past. Close call: Consider the United States po- aition on Formosa after Truman's statement: the senior United States representative was Consul General and Chargé d’Affaires Robert Strong, » State Cepartment career man of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE modest reputation. The senior military rep- reeentative was an Army lieutenant colonel assicted by a staff of three other officers and barely enough enlisted men to answer phones, drive staff cars. Not one of the military men had the rank or authority to provide the liaison so urgently required with the United States Seventh Fleet. Last week an incident symbolized the lack of contact between United States offictals here and the Nationalist government Six United States planes appeared over Formosa’s west coast. They were reported as strange aircraft because the Nationalists had not been informed that they were com- ing Nationalist fighters took off to inter- cept them A moment before they would have opened fire, they recognized the United States markings on the planes At Tainan, where the Anverican planes came in to land, Nationalist ack-ack crews learned only at the last minute, and then from their own pilots, that the “strange” planes were Amer- ican, Had the identification come a few seconds later, the crews would have fired on the United States planes Most responsible Chinese here are fully aware that Washington and the Seventh Fleet have a war on their hands and other things than Formosa to think about. Nevertheless, they have reasonably requested clarification here and in Washington of Truman's rather cryptic cease-fire orders to Chinese forces, and with notable patience and forbearance have tried to learn what 4s expected of them by the Seventh Fleet Just relax In the early course of these inquiries, the Chinese were told in all seri- ousness that there would be no problem of communication or plane identification since the Seventh Fleet would stay com- pletely away from Formosa. Incredulous Chinese Officials pointed out that planes from a United States carrier would surely at some time or other approach the For- mosan coast. What if a United States plane were in trouble far from its carrier—would it ditch at sea rather than land on For- mosa? The American attitude remained: you boys just relax, you'll never see Seventh Fleet ships or planes, The questions Formosa’s Nationalists most urgently want answered are these: Does Truman's ban on “mainland operas tions” include aerial reconnaissance? Does the United States ban on further naval blockade mean that the Nationalists may not watch, search and seize Chinese ships carrying supplies from Hong Kong to the mainland? If so, will the Americans take their own measures to prevent the sup- ply of the Chinese Communists—and the North Koreans—via the mainland? Does the blockade prohibition further pre- vent the Nationalists from policing their own territorial waters—including those off For- mosa as well as the waters off the mainland itself (which the Nationalists still consider “their” waters) ? Pointed as these questions are, they do not include the biggest question of all, I want to call this to the attention of the Senator from California, especially, because he has been more intelligently and consistently interested in the situa- tion in the Far East, I believe, than any other of the 96 Senators and that is no reflection on other Senators: Pointed as these questions are, they do not include the biggest question of all: Does the United States Government reaily think that it can protect and secure this island without protecting the government of this island? Does even the State Department persist in the illusion that it can ignore and destroy the government which rules this is- land without losing a position now ace« knowledged to be of vital interest to the United States? 10927 Iam going to reread the last sentence: Does even the State Department persist in the illusion that {it can ignore and destroy the government which rules this island with~ out tosing a position now acknowledged to be of vital interest to the United States? MISSION FROM MAC So far there has been one tay of good sense in United States-Formosa relationships. It comes from Geneial MacAithur, The Na- tionalist mission in Tokyo has been assured that MacArthur will send a military mission here to inspect and consult as soon as he can. Otherwise, in all matters affecting United States military contact and security on this island, I see nothing but an indictment of those in Washington who have perpetrated this crime against the vital Interests of our country. This feeling has not been stimu« lated or fostered by the Nationalist officials I have scen here, it stems entirely from what any child can observe in Taipei today, I am going to reread just one sen- tence: I see nothing but an indictment of those in Washington who have perpetrated this crime against the vital interests of our country, Mr. President, I believe I have over- looked something which I planned to read into the Recorp, but I have taken much more time than I had expected to take Therefore, I ask to insert in the Recorp a total of 11 pages entitled “United States Civil Service Commis- sion—Investigations Position—Report of Investigation” The document contains the further heading: “Economist, De- partment of State—Investigation Con- ducted by Federal Bureau of Investiga- tion—Distribution’ Department of State, Three Copies.” The document bears a stamp show- ing that it was received by the United States Civil Service Commission on, I believe, September 10, and that it was transmitted to the State Department. I ask that all these insertions be made in the body of the Rrcorp. There being no objection, the docu- ments were ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows: UniTep Srares Civi. Service CoMMISsSION— INVESTIGATIONS PosrtTioN—ReEportT oF IN- VESTIGATION ( , Economist, Department of Btate—Investigation Conducted by Fed- eral Bureau of Investigation—Distribu- tion: Department of State, Three copies— Report of FBI Special Agent Thomas A. Conroy, Washington, D. C., July 6, 1948) emigrated to United States August 8, 1935; naturalized at Washington, D. ©., —. Place of birth, Moscow, Russia. indicated he attended Herder Real Gymnasium in Berlin and received LLB de- gree in 1933 from University of Berlin, MA degree in 1935 from Sorbonne, Paris, and l'Ecole des Sciences, Paris. In 1936 he acted as interpreter at World Power Conference at Washington, D. C. From January to September ——- employed as market analyst for —~-— Co., Stam- ford, Conn.; October ——- to June ——, em- ployed by Department of Justice as legal research assistant; stationed at . doing research work on the , dur. ing which time he wrote several chapters for . Came to Washington, D.C, in January —— as research assistant ut from On October ——, appointed as assistant statistician, Statistical and Reference Division, Federal
10928 Public Housing, Washington, D.C. On. made research analyst; February . Transferred to . remain- ing until entered to September 18, 1945. detailed to OSS, (While previously at ———~, was economic analyst, O8S~—USSR Division.) Upon discharge, ap- pointed ———~ as economist, Division of Fore eign and Economic Development, Depart« ment of State; transferred to posi- tion of international economist, Division of Investment and Economic Development, Central and Eastern European Branch, where currently employed. In this capacity he works with the Assistant Chief and other ranking Officers in the drafting of final policy determinations regarding various forms of economic assistance, investment, and de- velopment programs, He also makes policy recommendations in connection with ques- tions of public and private investment and effect on industrial organization, economic stability and development of the central and eastern European areas and their relation- ship to the broad objective of the United States “foreign policy.” For the past several months he has been working on the question of exports to Russia and the satellite na- tions. Currently residing at ——, Wash- ington, D. C. BASIS FOR INVESTIGATION An FBI informant of known reliability was contacted by the FBI during course of previous security investigation conducted in June 1942. At this time he furnished a list containing names of persons of active indexes or mailing list of United American Spanish Ald Committee. List contained name —————. (Group cited by Attorney General.) Previous FBI investigations indicate that United American Spanish Aid Committee was organized by Communist Party and com- pletely controlled by it. An FBI agent who joined the Communist Party at the request of the Bureau In 1937 and was expelled from the Communist Party in 1948 and whose record as an informant was One of complete reliability, stated that was &@ member of the Communist Party and personally know to him as such, The same informant advised that wife, , had been a member of the Communist Party both before and after her marriage to She formerly lived with and the wife of Barnard Addes. They have maintained close association with ——, an admitted Communist Party member, According to this informant claimed to have been in the Communist Party in Europe end said his father had been a Trotskyite. came to a lot of “open unit” meetings and to all recruiting mcet- ings of the Communist Party from 1938 to sometime in 1942. This informant said he had had no contact with since 1942, stating further that was horrified at the Russo-German alliance in 1939. Another relfable FBI informant recalled as & member of the Communist Party in the late 1930s, His wife, » was formerly secretary to of Workers Alliance. His wife, . was member of and active in Young Com- munist League before and a while after she became a Communist Party member. A reliable informant said Bernard Addes and his wife were associates of in the late 1930's and these people were both members of the Communist Party and have been over a long period. Mrs. Addes and Mrs. were long-time friends. Mr, Addes ran for governor of Maryland abcut 1834 on Communist Party ticket. Recently named in paper and by radio commentators as well-known Communists who contributed 85,000 to the Presidential campaign fund of Wallace (vertified through compaign records in office of Clerk of Senate—contributed February 8, 1943). The same informant said CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE that when Mrs. was secretary to she was a Communist Party member and it was strongly believed that —— was also a member but his membership was never defi- nitely established by informant. however was a Communist sympathizer and propagated Communist principles and be- came quite friendly and associated with through Mrs. A confidential and reliable informant said was closely associated with . ,» and , who are admitted Com- munist Party members. Mrs. was found to have roomed with who was considered by the Burcau, as the result of previous investigations, as a member of the Communist Party, and who also openly admits Communist Party mem- bership. _———-, Interstate Commerce Com- mittee said he hired to work with him on Brookings report in summer of 1933 because of his ability to read and speak French; specifically questioned as to any Communist connections he might have had in Russta or Europe, and said he had none, and expressed himself against Communist Party principles. . . Federal Public Housing, states he has known from 1938 to 1941, and had worked under him for 1 year. highly regarded and stated during the time he had known had exhibited nothing reflecting on his loyalty. Division of Investment and Eco- nomic Development, European Division, De- partment of State, said he has known since 1945 and is now his has worked on some very difficult assignment involving Russia and the satellite countries and has never given any indication of disloyal tendencies, stated that in his opin- jon, there was no question as to his loyalty. , Eastern European Division, Depart- ment of State, advised he has worked closely with for the past 2 years. stated he has found him to possess views of a theoretical economist who frequently pushes ideas contrary to those held by per- sons concerned with political aspects of the question involved, but in every case he was sincere in his beliefs and in no way endeav- ored to bring about actions detrimental to the policy of the State Department. As this policy has become more and more Clear, has tended to go along with the po- litical viewpoint of the State Department. concluded by saying that in his opin- fon there was no question as to loyalty. of the Eastern European Division, Department of State, advised he had had no contact during the past year but both were on a Committee on Czechoslovakia in 1946 in which ‘wo groups were tnvolved, first theo- retical economists who wanted to pour funds into Czechoslovakia and the group made up of those on the political desk who were in- clined to be more cautious until a definite policy had been formulated by the State De- partment. was on the former group and was often overzealous, endeavoring to dominate the committee im his capacity as executive secretary. Was made to re- alize the State Department’s position and has caused no trouble since. con- cluded by stating that he had no serlous doubts as to loyalty. Office of United Nations Affairs, said had been of the above committee on Czechoslovakia as well as other committees. advised that never be- fore had seen a member of the com- mittee adopt an attitude such as that ex- emplified by . She said that evidence’ a strong pro-Czechoslovakian at- titude and approached every question with the query: “How will this affect Czechoslo- vakia” and not “How will it affect the over- all policy of the United States,” said JULY 25 immediate reaction was that he must be a Czechian National or at least of Czecho- slovakian ancestry. had no contact other than the 8 months’ period from April to July 1946 and said could not com- ment other than to state from his actions would hesitate to place too much trust in him from a loyalty standpoint. The following is a signed statement dated September 7, 1948, from , as follows: I served as of the Czechoslovakian committee in May ond June of 1946. My acquaintance with the person in whom you are interested js limited to this period. At the first meeting and at all meetings there- after, I noted that he approached each prob- lem from the standpoint ‘How will this help Czechoslovakia?” As TI recall, such questions as German transit rates, the settlement of the army's debts, and further loans to Czechoslovakia were under consideration, I know nothing about the person in qucs- tion, but the bias displayed was so marked that I.queried the and found she head reacted in similar fashion. I assumed he was of Czech origin and checked the register as a matter of curlosity, only to discover that his origin was Russian. Since he had worked in other agencies and his origin would naturally have caused him to be thoroughly investigated, I did nothing further at the time. I recall two other episodes. He requested me to have reproduced, as a committee document, an article by Maurice Hindus which had appeared in the CONGRESSIONAL Recorp. (I believe at the request of Con- gressman SaBatH, but am not certain). The article was a eulogy of Benes’ policy of friendship and cooperation with the Soviet Union. Apart from the contents of the article (about which I had grave questions), the request to publish it as a committee document was peculiarly out of order I spoke with Mr. Gange and Mr. Reber of the secretariat about it, but they took the posi- tion that the secretariat couldn’t question a committee member's request. I then spoke with Mr. Williamson, the committee chair- man, stressing the inappropriateness and the expense (the article was lengthy). He directed me not to issue it as a document, but to obtain a few copies of the Recorp and circulate them for information, That was done. At that stage I was beginning to have doubts of the nature of the pro-Czech bins— was it pro-Czech or pro-Soviet, particularly since the reports from our Embassy were to the effect that Czechoslovakia was over the hump and that he might be building up Czech industry for Russia. All the informa- tion coming into the Department during that period was certainly opposed to the position taken by the person under consideration, and policy in line with the reports was estab- lished by the Secretary shortly thereafter. Toward the end of June I attended a meeting of the Russian committee under Mr. . secretary of the committee, at which the in- dividual under consideration was present. After the meeting, which was on a highly secret matter, commented that he considered the individual dangerously pro- Soviet and that he intended to discuss the question of his further attendance with the chairman of the Russian committee. I do not know what subsequently transpired, since I went on detail to UIVA early in July. To summarize: I was so strongly convinced initially of pro-Czech bias that I assumed the individual was of Czech origin, but the mat- ters involved were such that Soviet interests were also served. The weight of opinion and information from the Embassy during the period did not affect his judgment or ap. proach, although it directly preceded and must have entered into the sharp policy de- cision by the Secretary. I believe I was to- tally unaffected by the Russian origin of the
1950 individual since that fact plus his previous employment led me to assume that he would have undergone a searching investigation and must have been cleared. It was con- siderably later, when all connection with the committee and the individual had been terminated, that I recommended an investi- gation. The determining factor was the realization, from facts emerging in other cases, that the assumption of thorough investigation in view of background was not necessarily valid. I still hesitated since I am totally opposed to Red smearing and other forms of harass- mont. I was questioned about another in- dividual both by the Department security officers and by FBI agents and was impressed by their ability and by their sincerity in trying to search out the truth. With that assurance of a thorough investigation and fair hearing for the individual, I felt that I dared not refrain any longer from recom- mending an investigation. This is the only instance in over 6 years in the Department when I have felt that I had to take such action. . Eastern European Division, De- partment of State, said he had been working very closely with recently on the ques- tion of trade relations with Russia and the satellite nations as to the policy this coun- try should take regarding exports to those countries. It has been his observation that has constantly advocated a “be soft policy” toward Russia and her satellite na- tions, said this would be consistent with the Communist Party lines; how- ever, there has been nothing to indicate the latter to be 50. voluntecred that he could not see how anyone in touch with the situation could adopt such an attitude as the employee and because of his Russian ancestry he would be inclined to be very alert as to the question of loyalty. , of the Department of State, said he has known for some time, but only from contact in committee meetings. He had had no contact in recent months. stated that from what he had observed he might question judgment but never his loyalty. , a former resident manager of Avenue NW., advised that had Hved there about 10 years ago; and that he re- called that at this time there was some lite erature distributed in the building advocat~ ing some kind of “peace group.” stated that he recalled clearly that some one of the other tenants had advised him that this literature had been distributed by Washington confidential informant of known reliability, readily recalled both and his wife, . as having lived at NW., prior to moving to . Prior to this the same informant recalled that and lived at . When the had been recently married they moved , and the above informant definitely recalled as having received Commu- nist literature at NW., and that he recalled that both of the received similar Communist literature at » Te- lating to some “youth group.” Washington confidential informant of known reliability advised that the name of appeared on the active indices of the American Peace Mobilization. , of the Federal Housing Office, Greenbelt, Md., advised that the had come there to live on , and stayed un- til . recalled had some trouble with the regarding one and residing with him in violation of the rental regulations which prevented residents from sharing or subrenting their apartments. She said the three were very close friends. A reliable confidential informant advised that had changed his name to to CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE and was a former member of the Young Communist League and is presently believed to be a member of the Communist Party, father has been a Communist Party member over a period of time. Washington confidential informant ad- vised that Mr. and Mrs. ,» Washington, D. C., appeared on a membership list of the National Federation for Constitutional Lib- erties; this organization has merged with several others and is now known as the Civil Rights Congress. Both of these organiza- tions have been cited as subversive by the Attorney General of the Untted States. Washington confidential informant who gave the above information is of established reliability and furnished the information to the Federal Bureau of Investigation during ® previous investigation in March 1941, was a fellow employce of when they were employed by the United States Housing Authority in Washington. At another Government agency, — listed as a reference, describing as being well acquainted with him and could furnish information as to loyalty and character. was a member of the Washington Bookshop Association; Louis- ville (Ky.) chapter of the American Youth Congress; and listed on the active indices of the American League for Peace and De- mocracy. All organizations are listed on the subversive list of the Attorney General of the United States. It has also been reliably reported to the Federal Bureau of Investi- gation that was discharged from a position as announcer for a Louisville, Ky., Tadio station in 1937 for making strong pro Communist statements over the air in vio- lation of that station’s censorship regula- tions, The State Department Passport Division files show that was issued a passport on , for travel to France, England, and Switzerland for a vacation; the file contains the name of , & State Department em- ployee, Avenue NW. signed an affidavit for the passport application that she had known for 3 years, Washe ington confidential informant, considered re- liable, reported that was a member of the Washington Bookshop Association and the United American Spanish Aid Commit- tee during a previous FBI investigation in March 1942. Washington confidential in- formant also advised that was a mem- ber of the Communist Party and that she and both held Communist Party meet- ings in their respective apartments at New Hampshire Avenue NW. They were both very friendly with the FBI Repost, JUNE 28, 1948, RicHMOND, VA. Sprcia, AceEnT CraAupe E. WIxuI1s, JR. , confidential informant who is be- Meved reliable, furnished signed statement June 24, 1918, and advised that she ts willing to testify before Loyalty Board provided her identity is not revealed to the employee. “As I remember Mr. when he lived in the Apartment, New Hamp- shire Avenue NW., Washington, D. C., in about 1989 and 1940, I would consider his actions to indicate that he was disloyal to the United States Government. Though about 8 years have elzpsed since my contact with Mr, . and my conception of the term ‘Com- munist’ and ‘fellow traveler’ may have been colored by present meanings of these terms, I feel that Mr. perhaps was and may be a Communist or fellow traveler. By ‘Communist’ I mean ‘A group or groups to overthrow our Government or cause dissen- tion or dissatisfaction with our way of gov- ernment or anyone who is loyal to the Rus- sian Government.’ By ‘fellow traveler’ I mean ‘A cover-up group for the Communists who do their dirty work.’ By ‘dirty work’ I mean ‘To pass out their literature or make contacts for them.’ 10929 “During the time I saw Mr. I ob- served him passing out Hterature in the lobby of the apartment for the Group, which at that time I considered to be a group which were disloyal to the United States. I received one copy of these pamphlets. I can- not recall that it said anything of a disloyal nature, however. I also recall that Mr. put this literature under the doors of the apartments on the upper floors. I be- lieve Mr. was a member of the Organization, because he tried to sell the principals of the organization to two of the elevator operators which he intimated to the operators as being better than our American way. He frequently talked about their low pay and long working hours. He seemed to me to be a fanatic on anything pertaining to labor, to unions, to conditions under which Americans work, and the pay scales. This to me was an indication that Mr. might be a Communist. “Another reason which makes me think that he might be a Communist 1s that he gave out literature which I heard supported the Spanish Loyalists, which group I recall ‘was supported by the Communists of Russia at that time. I know that Mr. was re- ceiving mail from Spain because * * 9%,” Witness: Clauds E. Willis. FBI Rerort, June 24, 1948, Crrcaco, ILu.3 SPECIAL AGENT DANIEL J. McCaRTHY Mr. , professor of economics, University, Evanston, I., State De- partment's Division of Investment and Eco- nomic Development, and was . He re- called that a whispering campaign about -—— loyalty had been rife for a while in his division. He belleved that the only basis for it was that was foreign born. Mr. expressed the opinion that was loyal. —— FBI Report, JUNE 28, 1948; SpectaL AGENT JOSEPH M. KELLy . professor of economics, Russian In- University advised that from to January he was Eco- nomics Subdivisicn, U. 8. S. R. Division, OSS, and that wus on his staff for a year. Mr. stated he became fairly well ac- quainted with and that he had heard or seen nothing to indicate disloyalty. Mr. concluded cn the basis of his knowle stitute, edge of that he is loyal. . executive of Co., advised that in , he was a deputy on the finan- cial matters to William Clayton and Division of Financial and Development Policy. advised that was em- ployed in under one , chief of & section under . Mr. stated that his contacts with were very limited. In 1946 a joined the State Department and worked under » and that was probably one of staf officers at present. always spoke fav- orably of and because of this Mr. stated he was of the opinion was loyal. FBI Report, SAN FRANCIECO, Cauir., Specran AcEnT Ricwarp T. CLANCEY . University, » said he was of the Committee on Russian Economic Affairs in the Stats Department in and that represented the Czechoslovakian section of the State Depart- ment in the committee meetings, It be- came apparent to some of the committee after a meeting or two that seemed to be more patriotic to his own country of birth than to the United States. Dr. advised, further that approach to the problems under consideration appeared “colored” and that did not have the traditional American patriotism it
10930 was felt was needed for persons serving on this committee. He said he could not say that was disloyal to the United States but he did not feel he was 100 percent Amer- ican. Dr. was reluctant to go into further detail. He advised that the commit- tee decided to make it a closed membership, which action was a courteous way of dispens- ing with the services of the employee. FBI Report, New Haven, CONN., JUNE 48, 1948; Specian AGENT Huco P. BLANDORI Manufacturing Co, Stamford, The personnel folder showed that as employed by that firm from to as clerk. Previous employment shown as engaged in law work with for 1 year, Subsequently he worked in ad- vertising with the Corp, from which he resigned when he left for . FBI report, Miami, Fla, dated June 12, 1948, stated unable to locate any record or knowledge of at Stetson University 1937-38 as stated by employee. FBI Report, New Yorx Crry, June 11, 1948; Srecta, AGENT JosePH M, KELLY , vice president of the Co, said he first met in 1937 or 1938 when immigrated to the United States from Europe. Mr, ‘a father-in-law was friendly with ’s grandfather when both resided in Moscow. ‘s family had been very wealthy but lost all property to the Soviets after the 1917 revolution and wore forced to leave Russia as refugees. To the best of his knowledge received most of his edu- cation in France, and when came to the United States he visited the home in New York City for a while. Mr. has not seen for 4 or 5 years. He re- called that several times mentioned his admiration for the United States. On the basis of his limited acquaintance with Mr, considers to be loyal to the United States, FBI Report, VeTROIT, MicH , JUNE 23, 1948; SPECIAL ACDNT JAMES J, KEARNEY , of the former Division of Forcign Economic Development, Department of State, advised he had only a slight contact with in the office. From observing at work and listening to comments, states he is of the opinion is a loyal American, FBI Rerort, Sr Pau., MINN Jury 7, 1948; SprciaL AGENT ARTHUR J. NORSTRHOM advised that although worked under his supervision at the Federal Public Housing Authority from to as an economist, he knew Uttle con- cerning activities and absolutely nothing that would reflect on ’s loyalty. . coworker in the Division of In- vestment and Economic Development, Eu ropean Division, Department of State, ad- vised he had worked side by side with for the past 2 years and stated, in his opin- jon there is not a mole Joyal person in the Department of State. Howevor, ad- vised that he also knows socially as a friend and knows him to be an acquain- tance of . During FBI investigation 1941, was & member of the National Lawyers Guild; closely associated with and was thoroughly aware of ‘a Communist activities. is known as a member under the name and has been engaged in Russian espionage over a long period of time and at one time was active in recruiting espionage agents from the ranks of the Communist Party. Conn. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Exruisrr 1 [Fiom the Appleton (Wis.) Post-Crescent of July 19, 1950] Tury Act Lixe ScREHEADS The fact that Senator McCartiy’s blast- ing of the State Department is recog.ized the country over as the major cause of the reversal of our idiotic Asian policy does not set very well with the Capital Times or the Milwaukee Journal which sometimes team up as they did in using the story of a re- porter who deliberately almed to deceive the public by omitting important written de- tails from filled papers The Times and Journal are fuming and furious, and may even have a hemorrhage, because it appears from the income tax statements of the Senator that he borrowed @ substantial amount of money Of course those connected with the Times and Journal say nothing about the fact that they, and the institutions with which they are concerned, have borrowed money in ex- cess of the amount tha, Senator McCarTuy probably borrowed. When they did the bor- rowing and took the chances, they looked upon the traneactions as strictly in the American tradition, as they certainly were, but when Senator McCartuy did exactly the same thing, or something similar, they began tearing their hair out in gobs What is a virtue in them becomes an of- fense in Senator McCartHuy. What is a prive flege to them is nothing short of presump- tion upon the part of this commoner who dares to try to better his condition in the world. Apparently the Senator decided that he might better sell his property, liquidate his loans, and devote the small equity he re- ceived to running down the Lattimore-Ache- son-Roth-Service-Remington gang at Washe- ington, a procedure that threw the Times and the Journal into crusty and grouchy moods, Senator McCartHy is devoting his time and his talents to rooting out the dizzy apes and slug-nuts who have been leading Amer- ica to ruin with the softly panting approval of the haughty snd egocentric professional Mberals who have been in fact, the world over, the softest snap the Kremlin ever ran into. The average man on the street {s no fool and, given the honest facts, he can make up his mind pretty well without the ald of any rig-lpped scatterbrains. That ordinary man knows that it took a sledgehammer to batter down the defenses erected by mum- blers and bumblers of the Lattimore-Acheson order, and that jf Senator McCartuy had not done just exactly what he did do, all Korea and Formosa would now be in the hands of Moscow and we would be picking up our duds in Japan and the Philippines and mov- ing home. It took some strong language upon the part of a man in the Senate to reverse the whole lunatic and defeatist at- titude of the State Department and the fact that an innocent toe here and there may have been stepped upon is of trivial importance. May we not suggest to these newspapers with the bloodshot eyes that they investigate the Senator's socks and seek if they are purple. Anyway, they won't be red or pink. Exuisrr 2 As We Sez It—Senate REPUDIATES BupENz2’ TESTIMONY (By Rob F. Hall) WaASHINGTON.—While the eyes of the Na- tion were on Korea, trying to gage whether this aggression of the Truman administra- tion was likely to become a world war, sorne+ thing very unusual but not unwelcome oc- cured last week in the Senate. The sworn JULY 25 testimony of a professional stool pigeon was discredited, rejected, and repudiated by the formal actions of a Senate subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and of the Senate as a whole. Interest grows, of course, when one real- izes that the professional stool pigeon was Louls Francis Budenz, whose eager lies have been so helpful to the Justice Department in its drive against Communists and progres gives. Prosecutor McGohey relied heavily on the tortuous fabrications of Budenz in his case against the 11 Communist leaders. Judge Medina took pains that the Jury should give it great weight. In the opinion of news- men covering the trial, the testimony of Budenz was the lever by which the prosecus tion pried a guilty verdict from the Jury, It was the more or less unsupported word of Budenz which brought a jail sentence for Harold Christoffel, the Milwaukee labor leader. And during the last couple of years, few noncitizens have been ordered deported for their political views without the gloat- ing participation of Louis Francis Budcnaz. Since the frecdom and happiness of s0 many individuals and the life of certain democratic institutions depend so heavily on the word of this creature, his credibility 1s ® matter of more than passing concern to the Nation. It is therefore of the greatest significance that the Senate of the United States did not regard him as credible or trustworthy Budengz testified April 20 before an open session and on April 25 before 2 closed session of the Tydings subcommittee. At the open session, with the klieg lights and the cum- eras spotlighting his garrulous exhibition, Budenz said Prof. Owen Lattimore was known to him as a Communist. At the closed ses- sion he sald something similar about Haldore Hansen, a writer on Chinese affairs holding a minor post with the State Department. The Tydings subcommittee, assigned to investigate Senator Joz McCarTHY's charges that scores of Communists held jobs in the State Department, listened respectfully to Buclenz. But after they heard his testimony and compared it with a wealth of material at their disposal, including copious FBI re- ports on McCartHy’s victims, they could not escape the conclusion that Louis Francis was @ sordid lar. The subcommittee cleared Hansen and Lattimore In their report accepted by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate, members said Budenz’ testimony left them “to a degree, in wonderment,” “We cannot accept Mr. Budenz’ hearsay testimony as controlling,” the report said in reference to the Hansen case. (Budenz’ testimony at Foley Square was not only hear- say, it was mainly his opinions.) His testimony concerning Professor Lattt- more "Was not altogether satisfying,” the report said. The Tydings subcommittee was especially struck by the fact that “even though Budenz has been reporting for several years to the FBI on various Communist activities and personalities,” it was only after the Mc- Carty circus hit town that Budenz climbed sboard that particular bandwagon. “Only since this investigation and the publicity concerning Lattimore therewith hag Budeng given information to the FBI concerning Lattimore," the report commented, This sudden rush of old memories to Budengz as a result of which he came up with the recollection that Lattimore and Hansen were “Communists” was “necessarily puz- gling” to the subcommittee, Beware of Budenz’ yeoman service to the Fascist drive against progressives, the sub- committee was anxious that their repudia- tion of his yarns should not destroy for all
1950 time the usefulness of the Justice Depnrt- ment’s stool pigeon. They therefore wrote into the report a sort of escape clause for Louis Francis' “character.” “We recognize that Budenz has been used as a witness by the Government in other cases where his testimony was not hearsay and was corroborated. Here of course his testimony is hearsay and corroboration is lacking. This observation is necessarily not & reflection upon Mr. Budenz’ veracity inas- much as his testimony related to what he was told by Communists.” But this is poor consolation to Louis Fran- cis and his Justice Department sponsors. The Senators have chosen not to believe him on oath. They have, moreover, suggested that his thirst tor the limelight seduced him into making sensational statements which they, for partisan reasons, felt compelled to ex- pose as Hes. The crumb they tossed him could not conceal their contempt for the professional liar. The chairman of the subcommittee, Sen- ator Mitcarp TypiNes, basing himeelf on the official document, called Senator McCarTHY @ perjuror, a “fraud and a hoax” Infer- entially, Louls Budenz was also condemned as an accomplice to perjury and fraud. Meanwhile the perjury and fraud com- mitted by Budenz in the trials of Commu- nists and progressives go unpunished This sleek little pigeon slips furtively from stool to stool while his victims, truly good men and women, face deportation and prison. ExHBir 3 [From the Appleton (Wis ) Post-Crescent of July 22, 1950] So Hens Is How It StTanps The three Democrats on the Senate com- mittce investigating the McCarthy charges have found them to be wholly without foun- dation, The two Republicans differed violently with this conclusion, They characterize the investigation as “superficial and inconclu- sive, the atmosphere too often not that of seeking to ascertain the truth whereas the committee's record is a tangle of loose threads, of witnesses not subpenaed, of leads not followed up” The people who want to arrive at the cor- rect conclusion in a matter of this impor- tance must thread their way through a maze of closed doors, suddenly secret sessions, and a@ kattery of obvious defamers who tried their level best to prevent the committee from in- vestigating the charges by picferring charges against the Senator himself. But even the Democrats upon the commit- tee are forced reluctantly to conclude that some of those attacked by Senator McCartHy were, to quote these Demccrats, “naive and gullible’ and that others were guilty of con- duct described as ‘‘extremely indiscreet.” So a man who admittedly gives to a Red top-secret information and whose voice is re- corded by the FBI as he tells that Red that it is a secret, is slapped upon the wrist and told that he was extremely indiscreet, while he is returned to his position where he may commit further indiscretions. In attempting to get order out of confusion let us look at some of the presented evidence. On June 21, Senator Typ1nGs asserted “that @ special inquiry by the Fedcral Bureau of Investigation bad established as false Mr. McCartHy’s accusations that the files had been stripped or raped before being turned over to the subcommittee.” A short time thereafter Senator McCartHy sent out a photostat of a letter written to him by the head of the FBI as follows: “I have received your letter dated June 7, 1950, inquiring whether this Bureau has examined the 01 loyalty files which the mem- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE bers of the Tydings committee have been scrutinizing and whether such an examina- tion by the FBI has disclosed that the files are complete and that nothing has been re- moved therefrom. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has made no such examination and therefore is not in a position to make any statement concerning the completeness or incompleteness of the State Department files.” So much for that Tydings whopper. Continue along the same road because the scenery is quite interesting. Unable to get the Tydings committee to subpena further witnesses who would testify that they were directed to strip the records, Senator McCartHy sent to the President the affidavits of four such witnesses, and sup- plied the press of the country with photo- static copies of such affidavits. Three of such witnesses gave their names. One was a junior at Georgetown University, another was an FBI agent, a third was employed in pri- vate industry, and the fourth still works for the Stutc Department and said that he would supply his name only if the President would assure him that he would not be fired for telling the truth No such assurance ever came from the White House. Let us see what these four witnesees said in their affidavits. Quoting from the one who is still employed by the State Depart- ment will be sufficient because the state- ments were much the same. He swore. “In August 1946, I started working as a clerk in the State Department * * I was assigned to a project with other clerks on the State Department personnel files We all were instructed to remove all derogatory matcrial from the personnel filles and we were instructed to dispose of these materials, The derogatory material consisted of letters, memorandum which reflected on the em- ployee. I cannot remember any specific file becauce we all worked on many files. But we worked on this project from August until the end of December 1946. All of the de- rogatory material in the files was destroyed or thrown away ” It is more than passing strange that a committee appointed to investigate charges refused to even listen to the evidence of four witnesses, one of them still working for the State Department, and refused stubborn- ly to let the people of this country have their evidence The people will draw their own conclu- sions. From Senator McCarry they have received all the evidence he could gather. This evidence showed that men were em- ployed to destroy evidence. It also showed that the Tydings committee willfully falsified to the country by pretending that the FBI had gone through records which the FBI deliberately says it never went through. Moreover, the Tydings committee acted as though it always had something to hide. When it had a piece of evidence that seemed to refute the McCarthy charges, it brought it out in public with a brass band. When it was time to inquire why men high in the State Department gave secret documents by the hundreds to fellows like Jaffe, the com- mittee locked the doors and drew the cur- tains. We expect that the public conclusions on this case will not be far out of the way. — [From the Washington Times-Herald of July 18, 1950} THe Report Nosopy BELizves Typincs and Co. says there are no Com- munists in the State Department and there igs no Communist influence in the State De- partment. These findings would be welcome, if true. Unfortunately nobody believes them. We can say with little fear of contradiction that even the three New Deal Senators who 10931 offer the country this sugared assurance don’t believe their own statement. What we had in the congressional in- vestigation of the Pearl Harbor disaster we are now given again—a large bucket of white- wash. What we had when incredible mis- Management was charged to the atomice energy committee is tossed back at us again—denials and evasions. But, mean- while, four spies in this country and one in Engiand who were stealing our atomic secrets for Russia have been arrested. What Mr. Truman called the Alger Hiss case—a “red herring’’—has been served up to us by the administration once more. The herring is a little higher now, and Hiss, con- victed as a perjury spy, is under sentence of 5 years and has been disbarred. We have got precisely what we have come to expect from every political investigation by the New Deal—self-exculpation by the party which has fostered, condoned, and pro- tected betrayals of the national interest and public trust such as this country has never before knowr What else could we expect? This is the party of lies. It is the party of Roosevelt, telling America’s fathers and mothers “again and again and again” that, on no account, would their sons be sent into a war he was then plotting It is the party of Truman, the product of the Pendergast machine in Kansas City, where, when 71 henchmen faced the penti- tentiary for stealing the primary ejection in 1946, the simple solution presenting itself was to blow the courthouse safe and steal the fraudulent ballots providing the evidence Tvuman is the man who only 2 years ago said of Stalin, “I like old Joe, Joe ts a decent fellow.” If the Loss Communist is a decent fellow, then who is to say that lesser, non- Russian Communists are also not decent fellows? Certainly the New Deal Senators who were commissioned to investigate Senator JosEPH R. McCarriy's charges of Communist in- filtration of the administration found no- body who did not measure up to their stand- ards for being a decent fellow. But why not? Look at the Senators. Miutarp Typ1N¢s, of Maryland, New Dealer, was the original sponsor of the present Sec- retary of State, Dean Acheson, when the latter was presented as nominee for under- secretary of the Treasury in 1933. TypiNas conceded at the time that he had initiated the move to put Acheson in the job. To statements that Acheson’s law firm had ex- teasive Wall Street connections, Typrnos re- plied that Acheson had also represented Rus- sia in American courts and accepted Mos- cow's fees. Now, as Secretary of State, Ache. son presides over Truman's world-wide anti- Communist crusade. Tyrpines also happens to be the son-in-law of Joceph E. Davies, Roosevelt’s Russophile ambassador to Russia, whose book Mis- sion to Moscow, was a flagrant piece of pro- Soviet propaganda. By another curious coin. cidence, Seth Richardson, chairman of the President’s loyalty review board, through which there filtered all of the curious char- acters Senator McCartuy has called security risks, is a law partner of Davies. And Typincs was appointed chairman by the New Dealers to investigate the whole mess. TxHropore F. Green, New Deal Senator from Rhode Island, is 83 years old and js chiefly distinguished as the one-time little Hitler of the tiny New England State. In January 2, 1935, even before being sworn in for his second term as governor, GREEN, in the space of leas than two hours, engineered a coup unique in the history of American govern- ment. He ousted the five Republicans composing the existing State supreme court and re- placed them with a Democratic majority,
10932 He killed 80 State boards and commissions manned by Republicans. He restored to himself powers long aince taken from the governorship. All of this Senator Green accomplished by unseating elected Republican State sen- ators on the basis of a quick recount by two of his henchmen, thus converting a Demo- cratic Senate minority into a majority. Garen’s Heutenant governor, Robert E. Quinn, his chief agent in this bloodless revo- lution, succeeded Green when the latter be- came a Senator, Quinn is chiefly remem- bered for using the State militia to shut down the Narrangansett race track in order tc put » political enemy out of business. The third New Dealer on the Typinas whitewash majority is Brren McManon, an old hand at sweeping New Deal dirt under the rug. McManon for years was one of the offi- cials of the New Deal Department of Justice, the agency charged with exposing and pros- ecuting subversives. If the justice of Sena- tor McCartHy's assertion that the State De- partment was londed with protected Com- munists and fellow travelers were admitted, McMAHON would have been in the position of exposing the culpability of the Department he so long served, and furthermore, his own dereliction as chief of its criminal division. As chairman of the Joint Congresstonal Committee on Atomic Energy, Mr. McManon previously had bent all of his efforts toward proving that the Atomic Energy Commission had properly safeguarded the secrets of the atom bomb. Only later did the arrest of members of the Soviet atomic spy ring demonstrate the spuriousness of the white- wash applied to the charges of Senator Bourke HICKENLOOPER that the atomic secret hed not been guarded. These three—TypINcs, GREEN and Mc- Marion—abruptly voted to stop the Mo- Carthy investigation when the war in Korea afforded a convenient diversion. They hur- ried to completion the report now announced, clearing every single suspect. They did not permit their two Republican committee col- leagues, Senators HICKENLOoPER and Hrnry Caror Lopcg, to inspect their report. They departed from the rules of the Senate by releasing the report to the press before they even tendeied it to the full Senate For- eign Relation Committee, in whose name they acted asa subcommittee. Senator Con- NALLY, the New Deal chairman of that com- mittee, limped forward with a summons for the committee to meet and receive the report 24 hours after it had been published in the Nation’s press. Lover and HICKENLOOPER would have none of Typinos’ phony clearance. Internationale ist and supporter of the administration’s for- eign policy though he 1s, Lopcs found the whole proceeding too much for @ sensitive stomach. In a@ separate statement, he as- serted: “The investigation must be set down as eu- perficial and inconclusive. The proceedings often lacked impartiality; the atmosphere was too often not that of seeking to ascer- tain the truth. The subcommittee’s record is a tangle of loose threads, of witnesses who were not subpenaed, of leads which were not folowedup * * * this business will never end, clearly or otherwise, if the practice of having the majority party investigate the majority continues to hold sway.” The pretext of the Tydings New Dealers for giving clearance to all of the men and women whom Senator McCartruy had dubbed Btalin'’s little helpers was that the State Department loyalty filles which the subcom- mittee, after months of Presidential ob- etruction, was finally permitted to inspect showed “nothing derogatory.” Senator McCartHy had anticipated this ‘weak defense. He had produced, tn advance CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE of the release of the Tydings report, state~ ments from one present and three former employees of the State Department that in 1946 the administration had a team of eight persons working for 5 months to weed every- thing from the files which was derogatory or incriminating. A deadline was set for this task: It had to be completed before the democratic con- gressional majority was replaced by a Repub= lican majority elected to the Eightieth Con- gress, State Department officials were even permitted to strip their personal files, so that the men who were defendants were able to destroy the evidence against themselves. So, all provision having been made, and a rigged investigation undertaken for the pur~ pose of ratifying a predetermined judgment, the Nation is now told by the New Deal that Prof. Owen Lattimore, the New Deal pliot of America's policy in the Orlent, was never of service to Russia. The public is informed that Dr. Philip Jessup, ambassador-at-large, who was knee deep in Communists 1n all of his years with the Institute of Pacific Rela~ tions, is neither a knave nor a dupe, as Mr. McCartHy called him The people are told that John Stewart Service, State Department far eastern ex- pert, cleared no less than six times by the New Denl Loyalty Boards (would a man whose loyalty was unquestioned have to make as many farewell appearances as Sarah Bern- hardt?) may have been indiscreet in his deal- ings with Communists, but that ts all. And the Nation ts also told that there was no fix in the case of the six persons arrested for wartime espionage in the theft of 1,700 secret Government documents which found their way to the offices of of the pro-Soviet magazine Amerasia In fact, by assurance of TypInes and his New Deal friends, the people need not feel disturbed about anything, and least of all about Communist manipulation of New Deal policy. The three Senators thus have made themselves a part of the Communist con- spiracy at a time when it is obvious that our ‘weakness in Korea was made known to the Communists of the Kremlin, and when It is certain that that weakness was promoted within the administration. The American people now have a simple criterion for determining Communist in- fluence in this country. It will be evidenced fully by counting up those who support the Tydings report. [Trom the Shreveport Times of July 19, 1950] GREEN LIGHTS FOR THE REDS The thoroughly absurd report by the ma~ jority of the Tydings committee investigat- ing Reds in the State Department is a green ight to further and future activities of fellow travelers and their friends in under- mining America and Americanism right in- eide our own Government The report would be the biggest laugh of the century but for the fact that a lot of green kids, some of them teen-agers, are dying in Korea with their faces in the mud—and some- times with their hands tied behind them. It was blindness of the type displayed by the Tydings group—inside the State Depart- ment and outside it—which laid the founda- tion for the international fumbling of the Truman administration that brought on the Korean situation, It is the Tydings group that now says that revelations of those sub- versives and blindness to them in the State Department and outside it are fraud and hoax. And as long as we have such as the Tydings group to clear the disloyalties, the traitors, the fifth columnists, and the nite wits who don’t know what they are doing, just so long will we have those subversives and Commies and lefties and disloyalists guawing at the vitals of the Americanism JULY 25 bullt and fostered through the decades and now facing destruction through those who should be its foremost supporters. However, there !s nothing surprising in this action of the Tydings majority of the in- vestigating committee. Hasn't it been clear from the beginning that the majority had Just one objective—to clear everybody with a tinge from Ight pink to deep red and to smear Senator McCartuy, who forced the inquiry? Didn't President Truman call all such in- quiries “red herrings’—particularly the earlier investigation into Alger Hiss, Roose- velt confidential adviser, which finally headed Hiss and others toward penitentiaries? Didn’t President Truman personally say he would do everything possible to disprove the McCarthy charges—to clear the accused? Didn’t President Truman personally bar essential files and evidence from the com- mittee? Didn’t the President and his subordinates open some files only after it was known that they had been looted of all important material? Didn't the Washington administration try to put the hush-hush on the fact that some 200 perverts had been found in the State Department and finally fired? And did agencies of this same Washington administration then rehire some of the per- verts previously flred? And isn’t it a known fact that such per- version is the strongest and one of the most used forms of blackmail by enemy agents seeking secret information from within Gov- ernment dcpartments? Didnt the Washington administration try to cover up the whole Amerasia case with an early Saturday morning court hearing in which United States attorneys acted virtually as defense counsel for those pleading, guilty to possession of stolen secret State Depart- ment documents? And wasn't the investigation that might have convicted others in the same case mys- teriously hushed and blocked? The questions could be carried on indefi- nitely. The answer to each and every one of them is, “Yes!” As Senator McCarty said of the report: “The most loyal stooges of the Kremlin could not have done a better job of giving a clean bill of health to Stalin's fifth column in this country.” Get out your medals, Mr Stalin; there are some fellows in Washington who seems to deserve them, Perhaps, also, attention of the “clear every- body” boys in Washington might be called to this Washington news dispatch, which came over the Associated Press wires along with the story of the Tydings clearance re- port and was published, with it, on page 1 of most newspapers: “WASHINGTON, July 17—The FBI Monday arrested a fourth American in connection with the leak of United States atom bomb secrets to the Russians, “FBI Director J Edgar Hoover said that Jullus Rosenberg, 32, operator of an engineer- ing plant in New York City and a former member of the Army Signal Corps, had been taken into custody in New York on a charge of conspiracy to commit espionage. “Hoover described Rosenberg as ‘another important link in the Soviet espionage ap- paratus.’ “During the last 2 months the FBI took into custody Harry Gold, Philadelphia bio- chemist, Alfred Dean Slack, Syracuse, N. Y., scientist and David Greenglass, former United States Army sergeant, on similar charges. Greenglass is also from New York City. “Each is charged with feeding top secrets on American defense to the Russians in war- time—a charge carrying the possible death penalty.”
1950 Yes, “each is charged with feeding top secrets on American defense to the Rus« sians * * ¢ And where and how did they get those top defense secrets, theft of which may be directly or indirectly responsible in part for green kids dying in Korea? Why, through conditions exposed in the State Department ard elsewhere by McCagstuy and others— revelation o: which is termed by the Tydings menor as “gigantic in its fraud and deep in its eceit,’ A SHAMEFUL PERFORMANCE The Tydings committee’s majority report on the McCarthy charges of Communist in- fluence in the State Department is probably the most disgracefully partisan document ever to emanate from the Congress of the United States. As a public paper prepared in parlcus times, it verges upon disloyalty. As such, tt goes beyond the obvious objec- tive of whitewashing the New Deal's calami- tous foreign policy. The inquiry on which the report was based was a staged and superficial travesty of in- vestigative procedure. For the committee made no real investi- gation. It clamped a New Deal Maxim silencer on the junior counsel representing the Repub- lican minority. It was friendly to the New Deal witnesses; it was palpably hostile to the McCarthy wit- nesses; and it permitted no proper cross- examinations, The majority prepared its report without consulting the minority members. And, as Senator Lonce has said, !t totally ignored its actual mandate from the Senate, which was a broad directive covering the whole question of disloyalty. The sordidly political nature of the Tyd- ings-Green-McMahon report is self-evident. It made Senator McCartHy—rather than the offenders in the notorious Amerasia lar- cenies, and the pro-Communist policy mak- ers in the State Department—the apparent culprit. In a front-page dispatch from Washington the New York Times said of the three Demo- crats: “They attacked Mr. McCarTHy, a Wiscon- sin Republican, in terms of harshness rarely used in the Senate's history. “They accused him of conscious falsehood and of serving the interests of the Commu- nists by raising baseless suspicions among the people of the country. “They cleared every person who had been accused by Senator McCarrny.” No wonder, as the Times also reported, the two Republican members declined to sign the report. Neither is the New Deal's clearance of ac- cused persona free from doubt and suspicion. One of those accused was Owen Lattimore, who advocated our desertion of Nationalist China and our surrender of Korea to com- munism. Respecting him, the New Deal report says: “Even the testimony of Louis F, Budenz, if given the fullest weight and import, could establish no more than that the Commu- nists used Lattimore to project a propaganda line anent China.” But what else was the Tydings committee appointed to establish?” For the record shows that Lattimore—by implication at least a Communist tool— for years was an influential State Depart~- ment adviser. [From the Dallas Morning News of July 19, 1960) WurrewasH, Prrox In Opp MIxrurs The Senate's Foreign Relations Subcom. mittee set up to investigate the charges made CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE by Senator McCantuy has brought in a ma- jority report that is certain to be confusing to the average citizen. There is no concur. rence from the membership of the minority hostile party. Perusal of the full text shows clearly the reason for that. The minority could hardly lend their approval to the mix- ture of whitewash and pitch discernible in the welter of words that lead up to the six sensible recommendations which the com- mittee makes in finality, As to these, there can be little disagree- ment in principle, but Senator Loncz has a sounder nonpolitical proposal for the make- up of a nonpartisan group for an over-all investigation than the majority could stom.~ ach. There will be hearty accord with the view that there must be some brake on the power of Members of the two Houses to slander individuals under the cloak of con- gressional immunity, and there can be no logical objection to a demand for more or- derly conduct of hearings, for greater infor- mation on the operations of the State De- partment, and for improved system in pro- tecting the security of classified documents. Unfortunately the subcommittee majority has operated in an atmosphere of partisan spleen on both sides. The majority notes bitterly that “it has been subject to an or- ganized campaign of unwarranted and unfair vilification without paralle} in the history of congressional investigations.” If so, it has squared itself amply with Senator Mc- Cartuy by handing him the He direct. In- deed if the full Senate shares the subcom- mittee view, 1t would not be surprising to see a test made in impeachment proceed- ings. Trew men have been as severely casti« gated by their colleagues in an official report, Certainly the report does not answer all questions. On July 12, McCarrnuy filed with the President a complaint supported by pho- tostats that the majority is also gullty of misstatements. A letter from J. Edgar Hoover asserts that the FBI has never been asked to investigate State Department per- sonnel files to assure their being intact and three affidavits are made in which afflants as- sert that they were hired specifically in 1946 to remove all “derogatory material” from these personne] files. The majority concede that the controversy has aroused public distrust and they want g body in the nature of the Hoover Com- mission to make a complete investigation, but the personnel would be named by the President, the Vice President (as President of the Senate), and the Speaker of the House, all Truman Democrats, good and true, Senator Lopcs urges an elght-man commis- sion, with reasonable safeguards against party domination. There is only one clear and unchallenge- able conclusion from the present report— there {s a Democratic majority on the sub- committee. [From the St. Louls Globe-Democrat of July 19, 1950] CONVENIENT WHITEWASH The spectacular developments in Korea, which prompted the President to move dra- matically to halt Communist aggression, have provided just what the Democrats need- ed to get out from under Senator McCar- THY's charges of Communists in Govern- ment. It was an “out” which they did not ignore for excellent political reasons, and they have made it formal by issuing a 3650,- 000-word report on the findings of the Senate inquiry committee, headed by Senator Tyrprnes, The majority report, that, is the Democrat report, labeled the McCarTmy charges 685 a “fraud and a hoax,” a “nefarious campaign of half-truths and untruths.” Not one basic accusation was proved. Nothing question- able about the Amerasia case. A clean bill 10933 of health for Lattimore, Jessup, Service, and Hanson. The administration in every aspect is clean as the proverbial hound's tooth. In short, McCartuy cooked up the whole deal with nothing, absolutely nothing to support him. Senator Lovce filed a minority report in which he agreed that the McCartuHy charges were “superficial and inconclusive’—as they were permitted to be explored. Senator HICKENLOOPER agreed in general with Loner, but may have more to say later. Despite the mountain of whitewash poured on the inquiry by the Democrats, we believe the public does not regard the McCarthy charges as groundless. Agreed, he did not develop them properly, he went into court inadequately prepared to prove his case, he swung aimlessly at times and his misses were just what the administration needed to ex- Ploit the utter falsity of his accusations. For political reasons, the Democrats, in- cluding the President, placed every obstacle in McCarTHy's path. At no time did he re- ceive even a semblance of cooperation from the administration. The Senate inquiry committee was flagrantly biased. And his Iecllow Republicans timidly stood on the side- line and waited to see what would happen. If he made good, “we did it.” If he failed, “he was on his own.” This was a cowardly attitude and the Democrats made the most of it, Now comes the Korean police action, a dramatic challenge of communism by the President. With the Nation committed to back the President at every step, with mobili- gation for war staring us in the face, now is no time to expend our energies looking for past derelictions, which the Democrats say never existed. So, in the shadow of Korea, the Democrats brand McCartiy as a whole- sale liar and declare his crusade ended. If McCartHy has succeeded in scaring the President and his advisers into cleaning house, into getting rid of suspected subver- sives, into checking thoroughly into the loyalty of government personnel, his labors have not been in vain. And we belleve he did ,ust that. Perhaps 'tis well thet the in- quiry close its books now. But around those books is an aroma of red herrings that even Korea cannot dissipate. And now as ever before it is necessary to make certain that the Communist fifth column, in or out of Gov- ernment, is under constant surveillance. The termites bear watching. [From the Cincinnati Enquirer of July 21, 1960] WHITEWASH OF RED CHARGES The report of the Senate subcommittee which “reviewed” the charges of Senator JosrrpH R. McCartuy was almost precisely what might have been expected. The Dem- ocratic majority of the committee devoted & great many thousands of words to an attack upon the Wisconsin Republican, without giving evidence of more than a cursory exam- ination of his charges. Both of the minority members of the committee, Senator Henry Casor Lonor, Jr., of Massachusetts and Sena- tor Bourkr B. HICKENLooPEg of Iowa, declined to sign the report, and Senator Lovcx issued one of his own, asserting that the commit- tee’s investigation had been “superficial.” Amid all the garish language of the major- ity report, here was little or nothing of con- crete value in determining the validity of Senator McCarruy’s attack upon alleged Communist infiltration of the State Depart- ment. Even the stanch supporters of the administration who insisted that Senator McCarry discredited himself will be com- pelled to agree that the majority of the com- mittee likewise tended to discredit them- selves as impartial arbiters of his charges. During the progress of the hearings there was
10934 at least one notable incident in which Chair. man Mrm.argp Troincs betrayed remarkable prejudice in favor of those nominally under investigation. We use the phrase “nomi- nally under investigation” because, in the ense of Prof. Owen Lattimore, Chairman Typrnes delivered a personal and virtually on the-spot “vindication” of the Johns Hopkins University adviser on our far eastern policy. In their comments on the Amerasia case, as in their remarks on the McCarthy charges, Senator Typ1nas and his Democratic associ- ates almost impel the use of the word “white- wash.” The public is left knowing scarcely what to believe about elther matter. What- ever basis there may have been for the Mc- Carthy allegations, he was given no help whatever by the committee in arriving at their truth or falsity, The subcommittee, at best, defied him to try to prove something. Had its conduct been a little more Judicial— or investigative—the impact of its denial of all of his assertions would have been a great deal more forceful. Indeed, the rhetorical fury of the commit- tee’s counterattack was not very persuasive. It will serve only to recall to most people that this is a congressional election year, and that, whethor innocently or otherwise, the Asiatic phase of our foreign policy has reflected terri- ble discredit upon the administration's State Department There's a line in Shakespeare which might apply to the committee’s majority report: “The lady doth protest too much!” {From the Wheeling Intelligencer of July 19, 1950] Buckets or WHITEWASH Senators Mimuuarp E. Typrncs, of Maryland, THEODORE F Grenn, of Rhode Island, and Brren McManon, of Cunnecticut—all Demo- crats—have surely laid the whitewash on with a lavish hand in an effort, political in intent and design, to escape from the very serious charges made against the United Btates State Department by Senator Joserxz R. McCartuy, of Wisconsin. They poured on th: whitewash by the bucketfuls in the 850,C00-word majority report they have just issued. It was expected, pe.haps alt that could be expected, in a campaign year, but the report, we believe, will someday torment its authors. The minority report. by the two Republican Senators of the investigative committee, Is yet to be brought in. Senator McCartiuy fought his battle al- most single-handed against terrific odds. As on other occasions when his opponents sought to shout him down, to smear him, and to put every conceivable roadblock in his path- way, the fates seemed to have conspired to eesist Senator McCarrHy. On the very day the report of the majority whitewashers was ublished, the FBI arrested still another al- leged link in the Soviet espionage group whereby United States atomic secrets were transmitted to Moscow. And this latest ace cused person is described as a former asso- ciate engineering iaspector of the United States Army Signal Corps who was removed because of information indicating Commu- nist Party membership. One of the most senseless and dubious steps ever taken by any Government was the admission of Communists into the Armed Forces of the United States when we were supposedly having a honeymoon as the pal of that ruthleas and cynical world conspire ator, Josef Stalin, + Senator Troinas and his Democratic com- mittee associates can put the whitewash on thicker and thicker, but it fe doubtful if they will deceive the thinking people of the United States. ' Acheson, Lattimore, and Jessup are still mistrusted by many millions of American citizens, and the time will come, we are cone vinced, when tor McCarry will be fully Muodicated. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE [From the Illinois State Journal of July 21, 1950) THe WHITEWASH True to their tinged colors, subservient to orders from higher up, Senators Typtnos, GREEN, and McManov, all abject New Dealers, have brought in what purports to be their majority report of the subcommittee ase signed to probe communism in Government, It absolves everyone whom Senator McCar- tay, the fighting Wisconsin Republican, wanted truly investigated. But it goes fur- ther. It is a signal to Reds, both foreign and agomestic, that they may work to undermine the American Republic without fear of mo- lestation from the Truman regime. More- over, it stands as a practical endorsement of the Communist fifth column in America, in everything tt has done and may do. Minority members of the subcommittee are Senators Lopcs and HicKenLOoPER, both Re- publicans. Neither of these two had been allowed to read the Tydings report before it was made public, but Loner, who often slants New Deal-wise in his voting, issued findings sharply differing from the three New Dealers’ views. Significantly, Lopce asserted that the whole alleged probe was superficial and in- conclusive, that the atmosphere too often was not that of seeking the truth and fur- ther that the subcommittee’s record is a tangle of loose threads, of witnesses not sub- penaed, of leads not followed up. In a gen- tlemanly way, Loncr was saying that the whole performance was a fraud. Senator McCarriy was quick to analyze the report as & green light to the Red fifth column in the United States. Senator HickrNLOOPER with- held comment immediately, until he could study the Typincs whitewash. In language both intemperate and unpatrt- otic, the report makes a personal issue of McCartHy, whose charges, TyDINGS says, are an organized campaign of vilification and abuse. Typtncs glossed over the testimony of Louis F, Budenz as hearsay, despite the fact that Budenz, the reformed Communist, was telling the subcommittee of his personal contacts and Knowledge He blocked off every effort McCartHy made to produce full and undeleted Government files, on which ta prove points which McCartuy knew had sube stance In short, not an effort was spared to make the investigation a fake and a fraud The American public now knows beyond every shadow of doubt the subversive at- mosphere in which official Washington thrives It has been asking, since American boys began to bleed and die in Korea, where the billions are that Communists have helped to squander. The public ts aware that J. Edgar Hoover, chief of the FBI, only a few days ago warned that the menace of the Communist underground in the United States is the most threatening in American history. The public now will know that Tru- man's whole concept is to coddle the Com- munist vote in this country, and the country be damned In this, he is joined by TyrprNnes, Lucas, and every other pawn of the dawning soctalism, The Tydings outfit, for the moment, has gotten away with its whitewash. Shortly, Americans will rub thelr eyes and begin to look Washington in the face. When they do, they are going to ask questions They will want to know why American boys have been sent to thetr deaths by Truman against Communists in Korea, while Truman's con- gressional whelps throw arms of safety and preference around Communists’ shoulders at home. They will want to know whether, with thirteen to fourteen billions of tax dollars apent every year for defense, Communist ine Ruence has directed that most of this money be squandered or, more lxkely, that it be directed into foreign channels helpful to the Kremlin. They want to know why, with all the braying from every department head in JULY 25 Washington, our boys were sent into battle stations in Korea without a chance. The Tydings performance may be rated, for a few hours, as a political triumph. Long before November rolls around, it will have served the purpose of bringing out the Tru- man administration’s true color. The hue ds red. AMERASIA, TOO The Tydings triumvirate wasn't content with calling Senator McCartHy every name that reasonable etiquette would permit. It cleared everybody connected with the foul Amerasia scandal of 5 years ago, as well That case broke tn June 1945, when FBI agents arrested Philip J Jaffe, editor of the pro-Rusgsian magazine, Amerasia, and found hundreds of secret and confidential Gov- ernment documents, Five others landed in the FBI net, two of them State Department Officials, Jaffe, whose Communist affiliations were well known, made a deal with the De- partment of Justice, in consequence of which he got off with a light fine. Then the inci- dent was hushed up, and the traitors tn- volved continued to operate as usual, except that the magazine was discontinued, It had been only a cover-up for the real bust- ness of stealing and transmitting top Gov- ernment secrets to Russia. anyway The Tydings outfit concedes that the doc- uments found in the Amerasia office were there illegally. But as for Jaffe’s having “fixed” the token fine that was assessed against him, Tydings the protector throws up his hands in horror Perish the thought! Senator Lonee scored the Jaffe deal, “It js shocking that the Government should Nave made any deal at all with this man,” Loner averred. It was not only shocking, it was unnecessary. The FBI caught Jaffe and his Amerasia group red-handed The stolen documents were there Many of them bore upon highly confidential American defense plans Either the Amerasia case was “fixed” by the Government authorities then in charge, or it was glossed over because the adminis- tration was unwilling to offend Stalin and his Communists In either event, the course was that of traitors. No Moon to Forcer It ain’t 50, says the Typincs committee Senator McCartny’s indictment of the State Department is “a traud and a hoax” There is no evidence, absolutely none, to support the charges against Far Eastern Expert Owen Lattimore, Career Diplomat John § Service, Ambassador Philip C. Jessup, or others named. Strewn through the 350,000 words of the Typtncs committee majority report are some mighty bitter phrases, Senator McCartuy, the report avers, has been guilty of possibly “the most nefarious campaign of untruth” in American history. He has resorted to “gossip, distortion, hear- say and deliberate untruth" He has used the technique of the “big Me," in the Hitler- Stalin manner. Purthermore: There was nothing wrong with the way the Amerasia case was handled, No “agency of our Government” was derelict in any way. The fact that hundreds of secret papers be- longing to the State Department were found in the offices of this pro-Communist maga- gine didn’t mean anything. Better forget the whole thing, and con- centrate on the pleasant task of kicking Joz McCartuy, That appears to be the view of the majority members of the Typivas Com- mittee. The minority rebuttal is offered by Sen- ator LopaE of Massachusetts, a left-wing Re- publican of internationalst leanings. If he had any preconceived opinions when the in- vestigation began, it is fair to presume that
1950 they were favorable to the State Department and hostile to Senator McCartuy. The Massachusetts Senator was saddened by the whole procecdings. In his report he agrees with the majority that McCarry did not prove his case, But he adds that the committee made no honest attempt to search for the truth. The investigation, says Senator Lonaz, “must be set down as superficial and incon- clusive * * * @ tangle of loose threads and leads which were never followed up.” In plainer words—a whitewash. Senator Longe particularly criticizes the committee for its “{ncomplete investigation” of the testimony of former Communist Lead. er Louls Budenz. The truth is there was no investigation whatever, Mr. Budenz, who has been the Government's key witness in recent Communist cases, charged that Owen Latti- more had been a Communist—and the com- mittee yawned and did nothing further about it except to listen to Mr, Lattimore’s denial. As for the Amerasia case, says Senator Lonce, it was handled “in what appears to be a timid, almost apologetic manner.” What is the public to conclude from all this? We think the argument over whether Owen Lattimore, or any other individual, ever car- ried o Red card saying “I anr a Communist” is pointless, and will never be settled. The important thing is not what men carry in their pockets, but what they carry in their heads. Lattimore, Service, Jessup, and Dean Ache- son—he is always in the background—were key members of the State Department clique which decided far-eastern policy. Without exception, until the Korean war started, they followed the Communist line, This is their record: At Potsdam, with neophyte President Tru- man, they surrendered Sakhalin, the Kuriles, Manchuria, and huge stores of Japanese arms, to the Communists. After Potsdam they ex- pertly cut the throat of Chiang Kat-shek, first with ceaseless propaganda about the “cor- ruption” of his regime, and second, with de- mands that he form a coalition with the Reds (as was done in Czechoslovakia, Poland, etc.). After the Reds had ejected Chiang from Asia this same precious crew bleated that Korea was “indefensible” and that Uncle Sam should never, never “interfere” in Formosa, Those made-in-Moscow policies led directly to the tragedy now tuking place in Korea, Young Americans are giving their lives in a desperate attempt to hold a Mne which the State Department for years tried and schemced to surrender, Were the authors of these Red-leaning policies Communists? Or fellow travelers? Or merely Communist dupes? What does it matter? Knowingly or not, they played Stalin’s game. The time has come to kick them out and, for a change, get some leaders in Washington who will play America’s game. The Tydings committee apparently believes that if it cried “Fraud!” and ‘‘Hoax!"” loudly enough at Senatcr McCartuy, people will forget the betrayal of American interests in Asia by the Acheson-Lattimore, Service-Jes- sup axis, If so, we think the Tydings committee is wrong. We think the people, sorrowfully watching events in Korea, are in no mood to forget. {From the Arizona Daily Star of July 18, 1960) Owen Latrimore, Setr-REvEALED During the past several months the name oi Owen Lattimore has been featured in the news as a No. 1 Communist in the De- partment of State as a result of the charges made by Senator McCarruy. Nothing defi- nite to support the charges has been pre- sented. Still many people have doubts, be- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE cause they can remember Jéow a similar site uation developed after Alger Hiss first ap~ peared in the news. From the beginning the Star has said that, although Mr. Lattimore appeared to be sym~ pathetic to numerous policies that favored the Soviet Union, it did not believe that he was a party member. Recently as a result 0: developments in Korea, passages from Mr. Lattimore’s book, the Situation in Asia, published in 1949 have received notice. One on the situation in Korea is particularly per- tinent. It reads as follows: “The Russians organized a national army (tn North Korea) grounding it on peasants who had land to defend and industrial workers who considered the new government their own, since 1t had been based on pro- tection of their rights. The army was equipped with Russian, not captured Japa- nese, material. “In South Korea the Americans organized, not a national army, but a constabulary, the backbone of which consists of men who served in the police under the Japanese— the most hated of al! who collaborated with the Japanese. * * * Various enterprises have been nationalized, but have been staffed with personnel in political favor, whose outlook is not one of serving the state but of building individual property for themselves and eventually converting public into private property. * * * The army cannot be trusted to fight; the people do not trust the government; the government can- not be depended on, and does not depend on itself; it appeals for continued American occupation and protection. “If there is to be a civil war * * ® North Korea would be able to overrun South Korea without Russian help, unless stopped by American combat troops.” Those are prophetic words, but they are also revealing ones, They reveal Lattimore as one who thinks closely in sympathy with the Communist Party line, and as one who resorts to typical Communist propaganda tricks. Let it be noted that he has only great praise and good to say for Communist Korea, and only biting scorn for the democracy of South Korea. Nowhere does he point out that North Korea is a cruel, efficient, Communist police state and that South Korea, as a new democracy, would be bound to show the usual weaknesses of a democracy. He says that the North army was recruited from “peasants * * ©* and industrial workers who considered the new government their own, since it had been based on protec- tion of their rights.” Just to the contrary, he ridicules the South as an army recruited from the former Japanese constabulary. How does he know s0 well that soldiers of the North feel the way he says they do? How does he know that the government of the North is protecting their rights? How does he imply that the Government of the South is not also protecting the rights of its soldiers and people? How can he say truthfully that the army of the South was a former Japanese constabulary, when its members were volunteers, 96,000 of them? Why does he present such a prejudiced pic- ture of the South army and such a glowing one of the North? He says not a word about how in the South all Japanese land holdings and all big estates had been divided among the actual tillers of the soil, and that productivity in agricul- ture and industry were increasing rapidly. He says not a word about how in the South men were free to criticize, free to choose their representatives to a national assembly and not limited to a one-party ticket. He says not a word about the thousands of refugees who escaped from the North, how the United Nations Commission was not free to Inspect the North but could go anywhere in South Korea, 10935 Mr, Lattimore falls into regular Commu- nist lingo when he writes about the partial nationalization of industries in the South. He says they “have been staffed with per- sonnel in political favor, whose outlook is not one of serving the state but of bullding individual property for themselves and even- tually converting public into private prop- erty.” The implications of that statement are that industry must be public property. People must serve the state. That is a demand that Stalin, Hitler and Mussolini always made. Private property is wrong, as is a free so- elety, Lattimore has not a word to say about how everything that was to be done in South Korea was being done under the supervision of American advisers. Lattimore’s words about the fighting quali- ties of the two armies sound prophetic, but he fails to inform that the Russians had no scruples about furnishing their satellite with modern tanks, plenty of good artillery and modern aviation, He ignores completely that we denied such weapons to the South Ko- reans, because they might be considered “offensive.” Today we are seeing that not even Amecri- can soldiers can stop tanks and planes with rifles and machine guns. Why did Lattimore fall, as a scholar, to present such tacts? He says not a word about how the South Koreans were forbidden to call for the uni- fication of their country, but the North Ko- reans could. In the name of democracy we Americans denied the South the right to make that appeal that beats in the breast of every Korean. In the past the Star has defended Mr. Lattimore. It now, as a result of what he writes in his book, distrusts him. He is no longer entitled to respect as a man of intel- lectual integrity. He has no business being a confidential adviser to our Government. — [From the Indianapolis Times of June 30, 1950] SMELLIER AND SMELLIER Senator Typincs, McManon, and GREEN are trying to get away with a fast one. Apparently they think it’s smart Demoe cratic politics to close up the Amerasia inves- tigation in a hurry while public attcntion is on the awesome developments of the Ko- rean war. By a vote of 3 to 2 they have overridden Republican committeemen, Senators Lopaz and HICKENLOOPER, and ordered the commit- tee staff to draft what they call an “interim report”—though it is obvious that Senators TypDINGs, MCMAnon, and GREEN do not intend to call any more witnesses or uncover any more unsavory facts in the Amerasia mess. Senators Lopce and HIcKENLOOrER have a right to be indignant, as they are. They have a right to denounce the committee ma- Jority’s outrageous steamroller tactics from the Senate floor, as we trust they will. From the start of this sorry imitation of an investigation, Senators Typrnes, Mc- Manon, and GREEN have acted like men try- ing to kecp the truth of the Amerasia affair from being brought out into the broad light of day. In our opinion, they have been all too clever. Neither the Congress nor the public can have any confidence in any report they sign. They have played hide-and-seek, opening commit- tee hearings to present one side of the pic- ture, closing committee doors to prevent the public from hearing the other side. Their chief counsel, Edward Morgan, in cross-examining witnesses accused of im- proper conduct, has acted like a defense at- torney—following somewhat the same pat- tern as the original Justice Department pros- ecutor on the Amerasia defendants, They muzzled the Republican counsel, Robert Morris, when he tried to esif the right ques- tions.
10936 And now Messrs. Typrncs, McManon, and Green are trying to shut off proceeding without calling the most important wit- nesses. Among the importent uncalled witnesses gre Laughlin Currie, Thomas Corcoran, Ben Cohen, Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark, and Judge James M. Proctor. Exurir 4 [From Life magazine of July 24, 1950] JOHNSON OR ACHESON? In the last 2 weeks or so, while inadequate American forces were being beaten back in Korea, it looked as {f Louis Johnson would have to take the rap. But to put the biggest part of the blame on the Secretary of Defense is to judge matters superficially. Our weak- ness in the West Pacific was caused by fun- damental errors. These fundamental errors were the errors of the Secretary of State, Dean Acheson. Johnson is wide open to criticism. He made much too much blather about econ- omizing, and a case could be made for his retirement. But he was carrying out the orders of the President. It was Truman who scuttled a minimum adequate defense pro- gram in 1948, and this year, when Congress wanted to reinstate some of the cuts, he opposed it. Nevertheless the fundamental reason that we were so unprepared to meet the Red at- tack is that Acheson refused to face the dan- gers of the Communist advance in Asia. He offered the military chiefs a phony choice: all-out commitment of United Statcs strength to anti-Communist forces in Asia or no effective resistance at all. Naturally the military men, hamstrung by economy cuts, backed away. Discouraged, they made no plans for fighting communism in Asta. It was Acheson who was Truman's chief adviser on basic policy, and Acheson was also Truman's chief alibi-ist. It was Acheson, not Johnson, who befriended Alger Hiss and was mixed up with the Owen Lattimore crowd in the State Department who stupidly or deliberately played into Communist hands in Asia, Johnson and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were for sending a mission to Formosa; it was Acheson who persuaded Truman to override them. Acheson would not only have let Formosa go to the Communists, he might have recognized the Communist Gov- ernment of China, if he could have got away with tt—and he still might. The country can have no confidence in the conduct of our struggle against communism in Asia as long as Acheson ts Secretary of Btate, Acheson should go. ERRONEOUS POSTULATES OF COMMUNIST PHILOSOPHY-—ARTICLE BY ERWIN D. CANHAM Mr. McMAHON and Mr. DONNELL addressed the Chair. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Wr- zey in the chair). Just a moment: In his capacity as a Senctor from Wiscon- sin the Chair wants to make a statement on his own behalf, and he then wants also to clear up a little misunderstand- ing which has occurred in relation to the question as to who should be recognized. But before doing that, the Chair wishes to say that it is not very often, in these days, that one can turn to a newspaper or a magazine and find an article that is worthy of the philosophy of a Plato or a Socrates. But the Chair had that experience recently, and in view of his colieague’s speech today, he wants to ask unanimous consent to place the article in the Recorp. It is an article entitled CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE “The Authentic Revolution,” by Erwin D. Canham, and was published in the Christian Science Monitor. The Chair merely wants to read one or two para- graphs from the article because while today we have been centering our atten- tion on the mistakes we have made, or have been making, in the Far East, but here, it is good to note, and this will be especially good for Mr. Barrett, as head of the Voice of America section, to note—— Mr. MCMAHON. Mr. President, may I first ask—— The PRESIDING OFFICER, Let the Chair finish. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, a par- lamentary inquiry. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. MORSE. I just came into the Chamber. I am at a loss to understand the procedure. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The procedure is that the Senator from Wis- consin has recognized himself for 3 min- utes to put something in the Recorp. Mr. MORSE. Does the Senator ask consent to do that? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes; he asks unanimous consent as a Senator to insert something in the REcorp. Mr. MORSE. Did any Senator re- serve the right to object? I should say k is an extraordinary procedure. I ob- ect. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The dis- tinguished Senator from Oregon thinks the senior Senator from Wisconsin is engaging in debate. The Chair is not doing that. The Chair wants to place something in the Recorp, because he has tried for 3 or 4 days on the floor to get something in the Recorp, and other Sen- ators have been occupying the floor for so long that now the Presiding Officer, as a Senator from Wisconsin, is going to put this in the Recorp. The VICE PRESIDENT entered the Chamber. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Follow- ing which, the Chair will recognize the Vice President. The Chair asks unani- mous consent that this article, written by Erwin D. Canham, be placed in the Recorp, following the remarks of the Chair. Mr. MORSE. I object. Mr. MORSE subsequently said: Mr. President, I wonder if I may be al- Jowed to ask unanimous consent that the senior Senator from Wisconsin may in- troduce into the Recorp the article which he wanted to introduce while he was the Presiding Officer. I objected. I did so most kindly, because I am very fond of the senior Senator from Wiscon- sin. I objected because I thought it would be a violation of the rules of the Senate for him to introduce anything into the Recorp while presiding over the Senate. While presiding he is acting for the Vice President as the Presiding Offi- cer of the Senate. It is clear that as the Presiding Officer he is not free to engage in the legislative work of the Senate. That is why I objected to his introducing it while he occupied the chair. I did so in order to keep what I think must be JULY 25 kept pure—the rules of the Senate. Now I should like to ask unanimous con- sent to have my good friend from Wis- consin introduce the article from the floor, from where I thought it should have been offered in the first instance. Mr. WILEY. I cannot agree with the technical attitude of my good friend from Oregon, but I agree that he is a pretty good fellow. I have seen a Pre- siding Officer do the very same thing sev- eral times. I did not do it as the Pre- siding Officer, as I indicated at the time. I offered the article as a Senator from Wisconsin. I asked if there was objection to my doing it, and the Senator from Oregon objected. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con~ sent to nave printed in the body of the REecorp an article entitled “The Authen- tic Revolution,” written by Erwin D. Canham, and published in the Christian Science Monitor magazine section of July 15, 1950. I call particular atten- tion to the significance of this article and to some of the quotations included therein. Charles Malik, Minister from Leba- non to the United States, has well said: To the superficial observer whn is unable to penetrate to the core of love and truth which jis still at the heart of the West, there is little to choose beween the soulless mate- rialism of the West and the militant mate- rialism of the East. Mr. Malik tells us further that we must not simply export our flourishing politi- cal institutions, our happy human rela- tions, our reputation for wealth and prosperity, or our expert advice and tech- nical assistance, but to be able to lead and save others we must export the great ideas of our minds, our great truths rooted in the Graeco-Roman-Hebrew- Christian-western European humane outlook. In this article Mr. Canham gives the three basic erroneous postulates of the Communist philosophy. He concludes with the challenge to all of us to get across the right ideas and the right way of life, instead of simply the material- istic concepts. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: THE AUTHENTIC REVOLUTION—WE ARE THE GREAT REVOLUTIONARIES, AND OuR REVOLU- TION IS A SPIRITUAL ONE (By Erwin D. Canham, editor of the Chris- tian Science Monitor) I Let me tell you my thesis bluntly at the outset. It is that the struggle for the salvation of free society in our time will be lost unless we in the West—and particularly we in the United States—awaken to and project the fact that we are the great revolutionaries in world history, and that our revolution ts basically a spiritual one which we have al- ready proved in action. We have let most of the world think that the American achievement is primarily ma- terlalistic. This is the great gap between ourselves and those who yearn for much more than materialism. And we are the first victims ourselves of the misunderstanding. The misunderstanding concerning Amer- fca which is so pervasive in the world today is the key to the future of western socicty.
1950 For, as Charles Malik, Minister of Lebanon to the United States, has well said: “To the superficial observer who is unable to pene- trate to the core of love and truth which is still at the heart of the West, there is little to choose between the soulless materialism of the West and the militant materialism of the East.” And, as Mr. Malik further told us in the West: “If your only export in these realms is the silent example of flourishing politi- cal institutions and happy human relations, you cannot lead, If your only export js a distant reputation for wealth and prosperity and order, you cannot lead. Nor can you really lead if you send forth to others only expert advice and technical assistance. To be able to lead and save yourself and others, you must, above everything else, address your mind and soul. Your tradition, rooted in the glorious Graeco-Roman-Hebrew-Christian- western European human outlook, supplies you with all the necessary presuppositions for leadership. All you have to do is to be the deepest you already are.” There is the challenge of the hour. These are not challenges requiring the postulating of new fundamentals They call for no pan- aceas. It is a call to awakening and to articulation. The basic need is to understand and to proclaim the truth, The West must find its voice. Let us, therefore, ask ourselves a few funda- mental questions Let us proclaim the truth on the issues which confront the world. Mankind today is being told it must choose between revolution and reaction. It 1s to:d that communism represents revolution, and that our system—which is opprobriously called capitalism—represents reaction. In such a confrontation, there would be no choice, Mankind must go forward But this statement of the issue is an explicit reversal of the truth. The fact is that communism—Hke totalt- tarianism in any form—represents the blackest of reactions. The fact is that the freo system, of which capitalism is only a small and modified part, represents the au- thentic revolution—not a subvorsive revolue tion, but a revolution which sets men free. We in the Western World are the true standard-bearers cf a great and emancipat- ing doctrine But we have allowed our- selves to be thrusi into the indefensible po- sition of seeking to protect the status quo. The free system is by no means the same thing as the status quo. Our tradition is not static, but is constantly dynamic. Our tradition strikes off chains. Totalitarianism would put them back on again. The stirring battle cry which ends the Communist manifesto is itself a delusion. Marx and Engels wrote: “The proletarians have nothing to lose but thelr chains. They have a world to win.” Where, in today’s world, are most people in chains? Is it in the United States, where what is perhaps the most enlightened labor contract tn history was recently signed by our largest industrial corporation and one of our largest trade- unions? Or is it in the world’s most exten- sive Communist state, the Soviet Union, where tragic millions, suffering and dying, are bearing the literal chains of slave labor? Is it in Britain, where labor's own govern- ment is in power and 1s carrying through the most extensive peaceful and gradual social revolution in history? Where are the chains today? Where are the menta} chains? Are they in the free universities and the free churches of the Western World? Or are they in the Communist states, where man’s right to think is now denied on behalf of the om- nipotent state, and free science or free reli- gion has coased to exist? am These are among the facts to which we must awaken, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE But let us come at our task in an orderly way. Let us first ask ourselves, in the most searching possible fashion, what are the chief claims of communism, and let us confront these statements with the best truth we know. Then let us examine the two doc- trines—communism and western democracy --in actual practice, to test their words by their works, And, finally, let us chart a plan of campaign in this great battle of truth against falsehood. First, what are communism’s basic postu- lates? The primary claim of communism—the foundation stone on which it rests—is that of dialectical materialism It its the assertion that ultimate reality lies in mat- ter, and in matter alone. But the truth as we know it is that superior to matter in every way is the reality of mind and of spirit. In our time an awakening to the metaphysi- cal bankruptcy of materialism is beginning to sweep over thoughtful mankind. The awakening is most striking among the nat- ural scientists, They are finding, in the realm of the very little and of the very large— of the Inflnitesimal and of the infinite—that old materialistic assumptions are no longer valid. Reality is now by them recognized to be related to consciousness. Time and space are seen to be dependent upon consciousness, Reality is emerging more and more to to- day's thinker as the basic essence which Nes behind and beneath the material manifesta- tion. In short, not the chair of wood and wicker, but the idea of chair existing in con- sciousness, i5 seen to come closer to ultimate reality, There is an even more striking and topical proof of the bankruptcy of materialism Men have wrought the most powerful engines in thetr experience, from gunpowder and steam and electricity they have progressed to atomic power. And yet they now see that the power to help or harm mankind lies not in the atom itself, not in the uranium or pluto- nium or tritium, but in the thinking that motivates the finger which does or does not push the button that does or does not set off these fearful engines of destruction, In the words of a great Yale natural scientist, Dr. Edmund W. Sinnott, “Man, not matter, is the chief problem of mankind today.” The second great lie of communism walks hand in hand with the first. It is that there 1s no God. Today we have the opportunity of knowing as never before that there is in- deed a God, who is the loving Father of all mankind. We do not necessarily have to identify God merely with the single three- letter name, G-o-d. Perhaps it is useful to redefine God as the central principle of the universe, Perhaps it helps to think of Him as Eternal Truth and Life and Love. These things cannot be denied. We know the uni- verse is orderly. We know that it works ace cording to established rules and principles, some of which we have been able to partially define. It seems to me to be rationally im- possible to recognize the reality of an orderly universe and to deny God, Still further to disprove Communist dia- lectic, take the assertions that there is no objective and eternal truth, and that only the transient and the temporal exist. I am sure that we in the Western World can readily prove to our satisfaction that there is truth, and that it ts transcendent. Again ‘we can prove it in the working of the laws of the universe, Or we can prove it in the vast and noble reaches of the mind and the heart. There is abundant evidence of the existence of permanent and Imminent values, These are accessible to mankind through a humble search for understanding. They come through the path of reason as well as down the road of revelation. They lift man- kind out of its own confusions and pere versities, They are to be confirmed not only in the religious convictions and teachings of mankinu, but in the positive philosophical 10937 traditions of Plato and Aristotle, of Hegel and Whitehead. Finally we come to another great Com- munist falsehood: That the individual exists for the sake of society and the state. This lie follows logically from the assertion of materialism and the denial of eternal truth and order. It is the specific doctrine which enslaves mankind. And yet tho truth as we know it and prove it in action daily is that the state and society exist for the sake of the individual. It is this Communist lie which stifles the spirit of man, It is totale itaria . It is contrary to nature and to man, Again in the eloquent words of Dr. Malik: “That the state, the mere organ of govern- ment ani order, is the source of every law, every truth, every norm of conduct, every social and cconomic relationship; that no science, no music, no economic activity, no philosophy, no art, no theology, is to be permitted except if it is state-licensed and state controlled: all of this is so false, so arrogant, so autocratic, and tyrannical that no man who has drunk deep from the living waters of the western Platonic-Christian tra- dition can possibly accept it. The state does not come in first place, it comes in tenth or fifteenth place. The university is higher than the state; the tradition of free inquiry is higher than the state; the church 1s higher than the state; the family 1s higher than the state; natural law is higher than the state; God ts higher than the state, within limits, free economic activity is higher than the state". It is good that Dr Malik should have recog. nized not only the spiritual importance of church and university and familly. but of free economic activity as well. For this brings us to the crux of our problem today. It is the free economic activity of the West which is most under fire in the contemporary world. It {s this free economic activity which is used by those who hate it or misunder- stand it to brand the West with the stigma and curse of materialism. The need, there- fore, is for an awakening to the sipiritual obligation and heritage of the free economic system, Ir Let us, then, proceed to the second of our main points. an examination of communism and the free economic system as they reveal themeelves in action. It ts not necessary, first of all, to belittle the actual achievements of the Soviet state. Historic objectivity requires us to recall the importance of the transition from czardom, the achtevement of partial industrialization in the face of two wars. In a certain narrow framework the Scviet state has accepted a large obligation to the individuals who make it up. It has gone a long way toward har- monizing the diverse interests of widely separated and scattered racial and cultural groups. In World War II the Red army under Marshal Stalin helped greatly in re- sisting and defeating a powerful aggressor. It is important to recognize, also, that we have to live with the Russians, and many of the things we find dangerous in the present Soviet state are traits and trends which long antedate communism. We must find ways of adjusting ourselves to life with an awakened Eurasian con- tinent. It 1s, perhaps, a blessing for man- kind that the awakening and industrializa- tion of this vast area has come about under a system which inevitably handicaps and mits its potential achievement Some- times one is appalled at the aggressive pos- sibilities of a Russian empire organized with the efficiency and power of industrialized Britain in the nineteenth century or the United States in the twentieth century. A great natural scientist, Dr. Merle Tuve, re- cently remarked that the greatest single dis- covery of World War II was the efficiency of the free system. ‘That kind of efficiency coupled with the natural resources and the
10938 immense racial dynamism of the people now under the hammer and sickle would make a world force of incalculable potential. Communism has partly liberated and partly stified this great capacity. On bal- ance, at the point of the midcentury, there is far more of stifling than there is of lib- eration. When, as I believe to be inevitable, the Russian peoples are finally and genu- inely Mberated, we must be ready with a universal system of peace and order. Other- wise, they will be an explosive force against which today’s communism will be a pallid squib. Fortunately, there 1s also in the Rus- sian people a great and magnificent spiri- tual and universal yearning. The free Rus- stan soul, in all its exuberance, longs for human brotherhood and bears a heavy bur- den of anguish for the spiritual failure of humankind. These deep impulses have helped to support communism, They would be far more effective in support of a free system wrought for the benefit of all man- kind. The Russian need for religion has partially and temporarily accepted commu- nism as a religion. When the Russian spirit is ultimately freed, it must find its way fully into the spiritual pastures of the great western tradition of truth and love. Other- wise, Russia might remain the world’s great challenge for long and turbulent years— far more dangerously than tn our own time, when Russia is self-curbed by a hopelessly inefficient and inhibiting system. Even un- der the present HMmitations, it is unneccs- sary to add that the Russian achievement ts considerable. But on balance the system remains one of chains and of slavery. It remains re- action, of the pattern of all the tyrannies that have sought to bind the free spirit of man and to withhold his natural rights down through the millennia. The fact is that communism in its works ts both spirit- ually and materially sterile. It is fun« damentally a failure, because it is unable to utilize more than the merest fraction of the forces which are available. It is the most profligate destroyer of human resources. Its concentration camps and its mass graves are filled with the richest of human talent. Those who survive are denied the immense productive force of free inquiry, of objective experiment, and of full self-analysis. Against all this, contrast the actual achievement of the free system of the West. The American economy—derided and at- tacked by its enemles—is today holding the line against world collapse. With all the faults which we know full well le within our society and in !ts economic organization, the fact remains that the world today would be in chaos without the stability and pro- ductivity of the United States. Tam not here sceking to put a halo around the profit motive: far from it. The first and most important thing to say about the free economic system is that it can survive only to the degree that the individuals and com- binations that make it up accept their social obligation. Moreover, there is a considerable difference between much of the economic organization that passes by the name of capitalism in some parts of the world and the best of the free economic system which enlightened lead- ership has brought into being in the United States and elsewhere. In many places over- seas, when we defend capitalism we defend a feudal or a cartelist concept which would appall the thoughtful American business en- terpriser. In some places, it is true, a sense of social obligation has dawned. We are not necessarily committed to the task of putting Humpty-Dumpty together again. But it is essential for us to put the importance of eoclal obligation first, and not place ourselves in the position of advocating the return of dndustrial or financial feudalism. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE wv The free economic system in the United States, and measurably in many other parts of the world—including, particularly, the smaller states where neutrality and/or co- operation have supported much real equality and high standards of Hving—can be objec- tively left to stand or fall on its own merits. It stands. It stands because it has given more opportunity to the individual than any other system ever tried. It stands because it is perfectible. It is not dogmatic—or should not be. It should always recognize the imperatives of self-criticism and of change. It should remember the para- mountcy of human values. But these are not values of social security alone. There are serious shortcomings in the idea of security, taken as an ultimate value. No society which enshrined secunNity as an end in itself was able long to continue the march of progress. Dissatisfaction, adversity, risk— these are the imperatives of progress. Fur- thermore, to enshrine sccurity as an enc in itself, and to place its procurement and maintenance in the hands of the state, is to say that the state is above the individual. That is the road of slavery; of social suicide. We must keep the individual and the tndi- vidual-based forms of organization as our primary values; man and church and school, along with family and free economic activ ity. The state owes nobody a living. At the same time, it is necessary and effective to organize through the state the various func- tions which the individual or private organi- zations cannot accomplish, It goes without saying that insurance barriers against the hazards of the economic systcm, old age or unemployment, are accepted and legitimate parts of collective responsibility. That form of social security can be kept in its proper place. But the increasing sense of dependence of the individual upon the state 1s not the ob- verse of the needful recognition of social obligation. It is, however, often the result of the failure of free enterprise to recognize its social obligation. In an industrial so0- ciety, dominated by mass production, the individual is peculiarly insecure. He will seek the means of survival through collective action. For the laborer and artisan, protec- tion comes through unions and government. Sometimes it comes through a cooperative relationship with his employer, which is best of all. For the employer, protection also comes through collective action, sometimes private and sometimes in governmental laws and procedures. But we have made great progress in evolving forms which are consist- ent both with free enterprise and with the special hazards of an industrial society. And again I must emphasize that these forms work best when they are founded upon a vol- untary and perceptive acceptance of social obligation. That is the final and indispen- sable bulwark of the free system. The fruits of the system are expressed in material and spiritual terms. Altogether too often we have remembered only the material rewards. We beast of our standard of living, and when we go abroad the dollars clink in our pockets. We are sometimes obsessed with material gain and with unrestrained selfishness. We have been our own worst salesmen, for we have convinced most of the rest of the world that we are money-mad materialists, But the greatest fruitage of the free system is spiritual. It stands in the recognition of the essential dignity of man which is implicit in equality of opportunity. It lies in the concept of legitimate service. Perhaps you will understand me when I say, not too whimsically, that the American Alling station is a very good illustration of the triumph of the free system. It is not the mechanical excellence of the filling station which is its chief virtue. It is its spirit. JULY 25 There are an enthusiasm and a self-respect which have infused the filling station and made it one of the most successful of our various institutions. I do not altogether know why this is so, I merely point out that our free economic system at its best has gone a long way toward the enshrining of human values and the attainment of a genuinely democratic relationship between server and served. I do not think anyone will deny that this is a spiritual value. Something of the same achievement was fllustrated the other day by the words of a German editor who recently had an oppor- tunity to visit the United States. He was taken to s small eastern city as the guest of & local newspaper. I asked him how he liked it and what he had learned. He put it in these words: “The best thing was that they introduced me to everybody, and they intro- duced me to the lift boy just the same way they introduced me to the mayor.” Awareness of the individual importance of man is our greatest achievement. It lies at the heart of the matter. Recognizing the significance of individual man, we have been able to mobilize and utilize the vast and still uncounted and uncountable resources of the human spirit. This is an accomplishment of revolutionary importance. It springs from the circumstances under which Euro- peans first came to the New World; it is based upon the political and ideological and spirit+ ual roots of our society. It is genuine de- mocracy. Established in the midst of the natural resources of a continent, it has en- abled us to become a material and spiritual bastion for the safeguarding of western civilization. We have been able to achieve the adequate blending of natural and human resources, and while we have wasted natural resources often in a profligate manner, we have come to utilize human resources within enterprising but humane bounds, This is illustrated by our rejection of child labor on the one hand and our increasingly wide op- portunities for women on the other, But I would not gild the lily. There are plenty of dark spots in our human experience, as we have moved toward fuller light. There are dark spots today. They are part of the chal- lenge, part of the incentive, part of the un- finished business without which we would decline and perish. Vv And that brings us to our third point: a plan of campaign in the war of ideas. The first necessity 1s manifestly self-awakening. We must rediscover the ideas by which we live. The ideology of communism its well known and widely proclaimed. It is pas- sionately believed by many of those who proclaim it. This awareness and intensity is integrated and guided. There is no com- parable intensity or coordination of ideas among those who believe in the free system, There will not be until we look at our heri- tage in fundamental terms and arouse our- selves t» its revolutionary import today. The obligation of every citizen, of every leader, js to awaken himself and to awaken his fel- low man to the significance of today's chal- lenge. The second necessity, after the awakoning, 1g the voice. Already there are various sm ‘1 voices from the free nations—voices seeking to penetrate the vold of human thinking. They must rise to full articulation. We pos- sess today mighty machines for disseminat- ing ideas to every corner of the globe. But we have not yet learned what we have to say. In fact, the message we must say is the same old message of truth down the ages: the significance of man under God, of his broth- erhood, of his birthright of freedom, The third necessity, along with the avvakening and the voice, ts the fuller dem- onstration of the free system in action. Thore is contagion in falsehood, Some of
1950 the les of totalitartanism and materialism have penetrated into our own thinking. We must not let them stay there. In this un- healthy atmosphere of no peace, no war, we have yielded some citadela to the enemy. Some have sought to weaken or destroy the free spirit of inquiry and of teaching in our schools and universities. Happily, enough have seen the truth clearly and have pre- vented the sabotage of our educational in- stitutions. In these bewildering times we heve yielded to distrust of human charac- ter, and the cloud of suspicion—often of slander—hangs heavy over the human spirit. We must learn again to trust character, be- ctuse free institutions depend upon respect for fellow man. We must spurn the corro- sive doubts which do far more harm to our body politic than the dangers to which they pertain. We must, as I have said earlier, manifest social responsibility throughout our economic system. We must make swifter progress toward the removal of racial and religious barriers which prevent true com- munity. These are but a few of our items of unfinished business—of our ways of prov~ ing in action the truth by which alone we live. And, finally, let us regain perspective, let us cast off the inferiority complex with which communism has bemused us, let us reaffirm @ consciousness of our birthright. We stand in human history as the great- est revolutionasies of all time. Not just we Americans—but ell of us in the Western World, We are the guardians of a sacred and dy- namic heritage. We have come a long way. We have a long way to go. We have discovered long since the eternal truth of love and peace and brotherhood. We have discovered and in a measure applied the enormous potency of the freeman. We have Mfted part way the heavy burden of toil that has crushed humanity down through the years, and more gloriously we have begun to lift the curtain of ignorance which has blanketed the human mind. We are on the march. And today we are challenged. For the challenge we may be infinitely grateful. Be- cause our society today faces adversity, There is a hill up which we must climb. We will not decline in slothful ease. We will pit ourselves against the lies which in our time assault the deep foundations of truth. These lics cannot prevail, even to the extent of setting civilization into a relapse, if we are worthy cf our heritage. And we can and will be worthy of that heritage if and as we awaken. The voice of no One of us is powerful enough to awaken all the slumberers in today’s world. It is our individual and collective duty to think these things through for ourselves, and in our free way to help our brother man to his needful awareness. Let us pass along the message of freedom. One day it will reach critical mass and a chain reaction will begin. Meantime, we must preserve the physical defonses of the Western World by keeping military aggression at bay; we must strength- en the economic sinews and the stability of the free wcrld; we must lead our clviliza- tion to higher plateaus of demonstrated free- dom and achievement. And from the valley below, those who have accepted the false doctrines of totalitarian- fam of the right or the left will one day see the heights to which we have ascended and will join us on the continuous pathway ahead, MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE A message from the House of Repre- sentatives, by Mr. Snader, its assistant reading clerk, announced that the House had passed, without amendment, the bill CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE (8. 3937) to authorize the President to extend enlistments in the Armed Forces of the United States. STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION Mr. DONNELL and Mr. MCMAHON addressed the Chair. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair was walking through the door into the Chamber, and therefore does not know which Senator first addressed the Chair. For what purpose do the two Senators rise Mr. McMAHON. I rise to talk for about 3 minutes, The VICE PRESIDENT. Under those conditions, the Chair will recognize the Senator from Connecticut. Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, inas- much as the Chair requested the two Senators to state for what purpose they rose, I should like to have an oppor- tunity to state it. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Missouri. Mr. DONNELL. I rise for the purpose of obtaining the floor. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair recognizes the Senator from Connecticut, because he says he only wants 3 minutes. Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, we have listened to the junior Senator from Wisconsin discuss the report of the sub- committee on foreign relations regarding employee loyalty in the State Depart- ment. He stated, and I am sure he did not mean to, that the committee had cleared Mr. Remington. Mr. Reming- ton’s case was not considered by the committee, because he was never an em- ployee of the State Department. The Senator from Wisconsin has also read to the Senate and placed in the Recorp an investigative report of the Federal Bureau of Investigation on one of the cases which the Senator sub- mitted to the subcommittee. He has crossed out the name of the subject. I was able, however, to identify the man in question, and I have received from him permission to place in the REcorp some 21 affidavits as to his loyalty, patri- otism, and integrity. I must do the nec- essary clerical work of crossing out the man’s name wherever it appears. I should like to read an excerpt from the first affidavit in the file given by a man and wife of undisputed ability, integrity, and patriotism. It is rather a lengthy affidavit, but I should like the Senate to get the benefit of two or three paragraphs of it, because they are some- what illuminating. I read: Since was Russian born, we were especially interested in his views regarding Soviet development, and would have quickly detected any Communist sympathies, if he had any, no matter how cleverly they might have been concealed, for in a long, intimate relationship-.there sre many unguarded mo- ments when, in words, or gestures, or facial expressions, the deepest thoughts and feel- ings of friends are revealed. We have heard from him and his parents about his early childhood in Russia, particularly during the revolution, when his family were refugees, They had nothing in common with revolue tionists. In analyzing Soviet developments, has, however, been clear-headed and objective. His views on the Soviet Union 10939 have not been prejudiced by emotional cone siderations arising from the fact that he was denied the heritage of a native homeland. His intellectual discipline was of too high a standard to have permitted it. He has re- garded Soviet developments in the light of basic social forces and world trends. We discussed at great length the signifi- cance of Russia's turn against Germany and her alinement with the democracies. His view, which, if publicly expressed at the time, would have constituted a serious indiscre- tion, and that the Second World War had come to be not at all a conflict between two ideologies or ways of life but rather a con- flict between Germany and Russia for lead- ership of a totalitarian movement (fascism vs. communism), leaving the question of totalitarianism versus democracy to be fought out later between the United States and Russia. He recognized, however, that our choice was to face the prospect of a second bout, against Russia, or run the risk of losing the first bout against Germany, and was ac- cordingly reconciled to our alliance with the Soviet Union. The point is that ——. and his wife, who shared his views, were pri- vately not sympathetic toward Russia at the time when expressions of pro-Soviet sympa. thies were popular. The were not without a sense of humor, however, regarding the Commu. nist experiment in Russia. We recall in par- ticular a book which they lent us, written by two Russians, with the title of The Little Golden Calf, the amusing situations in which were based on the corruption and in- credible stupidity of Sovict officials and ad- ministrators. It was a source of delight to that the book, written in the early twenties by approved Communist aue- thors, achieved such popularity in the Soviet Union that the Government, after discover- ing its subtle satire on the Soviet regime, was unable to effect its suppression. It is also recalled that among other books which the lent us was a novel of outstanding merit regarding Soviet Russia, Darkness at Noon, by Koestler, which is the most convincing and devastating commen- tary on the Communist regime which we have read. It is devastating for the reason that, although the author, like , is able to present with tolerance and under- standing the social grievances which have fostered the rise of communism, he, like —————, 18 quick to point out with equal objectivity the logical consequences of the Communist philosophy and course of action; namely, the enslavement of the individual, or, 1f he resists, his extermination. It 1s perhaps conceivable that unsophisti- cated persons, impressed only by emotional manifestations, might have, through ignor- ance, mistaken intellectual ob- jectivity toward Russia as a symptom of Communist sympathy. It is not conceivable, however, that anyone capable of a rational approach to social problems and their solu- tions could interpret views re- garding Russia as anything but deeply and emphatically opposed to communism and Communists’ activities. We have known -———_—~— 856 wife and mother, extremely devoted to her hustand and children, and as a highly in- telligent person interested chiefly in the arts, rather than in political, social, or economic matters. We have observed that in regard to such matters she shares her husband's views. It would be difficult to believe that, in view of the exceptionally close and har- monious relations between her and her hus- band, she could hold political views differ- ing substantially from those of her husband. I, Betty Carr, have discussed with . among other subjects of usual interest to women, problems of child train- ing and care and know that she strongly
10940 opposes regimentation and tries to encour- age in her children the spirit of individual- ism. She, as well as her husband, believes strongly in the institution of the family and in the tnstitution of private property on which it is in a large part based. On the basis of our long and intimate re- lationship with and ——_---—-, we are convinced that they are not Communists, that they are not in sym- pathy with Communist philosophy, objec- tives, or activities, and that they can be completely trusted as Joyal Americans, faith- ful and devoted to the political, economic, and social principles embodied in the Con- stitution of the United States, In fact, we cannot conceive on what basis their loyalty might be questioned, and are deeply dis- tressed that such a statement as this should be necessary. Mr. President, this is one of 21 affil- davits bearing upon the subject's loyalty. One of the most distinguished Members of this body, who does not sit on this side of the aisle, but on the other side of the aisle, has an affidavit in this file as to this man’s Americanism as of 1938. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator give the name of that Senator? Mr. McMAHON. Yes; I intend to place the affidavit in the Recorp. I re- fer to the junior Senator from Oregon (Mr. Morse]. This man worked for the junior Senator from Oregon on a project, in the Department of Justice in 1938 This is an example of the situation about which I spoke several days ago. If we take simply one part of a file and say that on the basis of it, without any hearings, without giving the accused an opportunity to appear and offer evidence to contradict the evidence given, then I say that if we stand for that system we have denied one of the basic and funda- mental propositions which we hold to be basically American. Mr. BREWSTER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McMAHON. I shall not yield. I have sat here for 3 hours, it is now 3:30 p m. and I have not had any lunch. I shall place this matter in the Recorp, and then I shall get some lunch. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that at this point in my remarks the 21 affidavits bearing upon this subject, which, of course, were weighed by the Loyalty Board, in addition to all the other material in the file, be printed in the REcorD. Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, re- serving the right to object, unless the Senator will show me the name on the affidavit, to see whether it is the same individual whom I mentioned, I shall have to object. Otherwise, I would have no way of knowing whether it is the same individual. Mr. McMAHON. Does the Senator wish to look at the affidavit? Mr. McCARTHY. Yes. Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, while the Senator is looking at the affidavit, let me say that he has also referred to a gentleman by the name of Theodore Gei- ger, an ECA employee. Mr. Geiger was the subject of some attention by our as- sistant counsel, Mr, Morris. I should like to read into the Rrcorp at this point a letter written on the letter- head of the Economic Cooperation Ad- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE ministration, signed by William Foster as Acting Administrator, dated July 6. I ask the Senator from Wisconsin if he has found that the name in the affi- davit which I handed him is that of the same individual he had in mind. Mr. McCARTHY. The last name is the same, and the first name is the same. Mr. McMAHON. The Senator under- stands that I shall delete the names as I put the affidavits into the Rrcorp, It is quite regrettable that the Senator from Wisconsin, when he put in a part of the file, was not able to give us the rest of the file, so that we could have both sides of the case. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob- jection, the 21 affidavits will be printed in the REcorp. (Sce exhibit 1.) Mr McMAHON. The letter from Mr. Foster, which is addressed to the chair- man of the so-called Tydings-McMahon committee, reads: Economic COOPERATION ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D. C., July 5, 1950. Hon MILiarp E TyYpINGs, Untted States Senate, Washington, D, C. Dear SENATOR Typincs In connection with your inquiry of July 8, 1950, concerning Theodore Geiger, an ECA employee, I would like to state that he has been investigated as to loyalty and security by the Federal Bureau of Investigation Such an investiga- tion is required by rection 110 (c) of Public Law 472, the Foreign Assistance Act of 1948, which prescribes as follows “(c) No citizen or resident of the United States may be employed, or if already em- ployed, may be assigned under this title for a period to exceed 3 months unless such indi- vidual has been investigated as to loyalty and security by the Federal Bureau of In- vestigation and a report thereon has been made to the Secrotary of State and the Ad- ministrator, and until the Secretary of State or the Administrator has certified in writing (and filed copies thereof with the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations anc the House Committee on Foreign Affairs) that, after full consideration of such report, he belleves such individual is loyal to the United States, its Constitution, and form of govern- ment, and ts not now and has never been a@ member of any organization advocating contrary views.” In accordance with these provisions of the Jaw and after full consideration of the infor- mation developed, Mr Hoffman certified in writing his belief as to the loyalty of Mr. Geiger. Sincerely yours, WILLIAM Foster, Acting Administrator. It will be recalled that the Geiger case was referred to as one which had been suppressed and covered up, and upon which the people of the United States had been misled. I do not think that Mr. William Foster or Mr. Paul Hoffman, who are gentlemen whose friendship I am privileged to enjoy, are the kind of Americans who would engage in the sort of conspiracy which has been alleged here, namely, keeping an improper per- son in the employ of the Government of the United States. They would no more do that than would Gen. Conrad Snow do it. General Snow is the head of the Loyalty Board of the State Department, which passes on these cases. General Snow’s loyalty and patriotism and in- JULY 25 tegrity and ability were certified to by no one else than the second ranking mi- nority Member of this body, the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Brinces]. The Senator’s statement will be found in the hearings of the Committee on Ap- propriations. When he was asked his opinion of the reputation of this eminent and outstanding citizen of his State, he replied that it was of the best. Mr. President, I think that is all I have to say. Perhaps I should close with a Latin maxim: Falsus in uno, falsus {n omnibus. Mr. MORSE and Mr. DONNELL ad- dressed the Chair. The VICE PRESIDENT. Does the Senator from Connecticut yield and if so, to whom? Mr. McMAHON. I yield to the Sena- tor from Oregon [ Mr. Morse]. Mr MORSE I was called to the long- distance telephone and while I was out of the Chamber the Senator from Con- necticut introduced an affidavit which I had signed some time ago with regard to a former employee. Does the S:n- ator have the affidavit in his possession? Mr. McMAHON. Yes. Mr. MORSE. Did the Senator intro- duce it in the record? Mr. McMAHON. Yes Mr. MORSE Will the Senator per- mit me to see the affidavit at this time? Mr. McMAHON. Certainly. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. McMAHON. I ypield. Mr. WHERRY. I refer to the letter from Mr. Foster, which was read into the record by the Senator from Con- necticut. Does the Senator know when the investigation of Mr. Geiger was made? Mr. McMAHON. No; I cannot give the date Mr. WHERRY. I notice that the let- ter is dated July 5, 1950. Mr. McMAHON. Yes. Mr. WHERRY. I should like to ask when he was investigated, because it scems to me that all that is being done here is to get a testimonial letter to answer Mr. Morris I should like to make that plain on the record. This incident happened on June 28. A letter goes down to the ECA. It is dated July 3. On July 5 a letter comes back from the ECA and says that Mr. Geiger has been investigated. When was he inves- tigated? Who investigated him. That does not foreclose what Mr. Morris wanted to do. He wanted to produce testimony to be heard by the committee. Now we are asked to take a testimonial letter to be a final conclusion of the matter on this man, when the minority counsel asked that a hearing be held so that testimony could be presented. Cer- tainly the distinguished prosecutor, the Senator from Connecticut, who is one of the most able prosecutors who has ever served in Washington, would not consider that to be the proper way to handle an investigation of a man who is being charged with what he is being charged. I want that to be perfectly clear in the record. To me it is another indication of how the investigations
1950 were made of the men whose names were brought to the attention of the committee. To my mind, that is a whitewash. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Connecticut yielded for a question. Mr. McMAHON. Yes. I cannot help but be somewhat—I was going to say amused—interested by the vehement reaction of the Senator from Nebraska. I shall call the Senator's remarks to the attention of Mr. Paul Hoffman and Mr. Foster. I shall do that on my private initiative. The committee is discharged. However, I shall call their attention to their clearance and to what the Senator from Nebraska has stated. I shall be very happy to show their response to the Senator from Nebraska. I imagine it was very disappointing when this letter showed up. It must have been very dis- appointing, indeed. However, we must suffer these vicissitudes sometime. I know the Senator from Nebraska will take it in good grace. ExuHipir 1 KEPUBLIC OF FRANCE, DEPARTMENT OF SEINE, Ciry or Parris, Embassy of the Untted States of America, ss: AFFIDAVIT FOR THE LOYALTY AND SECURITY BoaRp OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE CON- CERNING ——————— We, Robert M and Betty M. Carr, having been advised that a question has arisen concerning the loyalty of and ———_——, desire to offer the following testi- mony in their behalf. I, Robert Carr, was employed by the De- partment of State from July 2, 1934, until October 31, 1946, when I transferred from the Department to the Foreign Service of the United States, class 38. I am at present First Secretary of Embassy at Paris, France. I came to the Department with Henry Fran- cis Grady when he became the first Chief of the Division of Trade Agreements. I was, previously, his teaching assistant at the Uni- versity of California, where he was professor of international trade and dean of the Col- lege of Commerce, and where I received my Ph. D. in economics. When Dr. Grady be- came Assistant Secretary of State in 1939, I served as his assistant. I also served under him in New Delhi, India, where he was American Ambassador, 1947-48. Other im- mediate superiors under whom I have worked are John G. Winant (now deceased), for- merly American Ambassador to London; Dean Acheson, formerly Assistant Secretary of State; and Harry C. Hawkins, formerly Director of the Office of International Trade Policy, Department of State. I, Betty Carr, was married to my husband when he was a teaching assistant to Dr. Grady at the University of California, where I received my master’s degree and completed except for a thesis, the requirements for a Ph, D. in philosophy. We first met —————— in an alr-raid shelter near Le Havre, France, in September 1939, at which time all four of us were wait- ing for return passage to the United States, and learned that they also lived in Wash- ington and that was employed by the United States Government. We also at that time became well acquainted with father, mother, and sister. I, Robert Carr, later supported applications for American visas made by sister and mother and helped during wartime to find passage to the United States for his sister. His father died at the time of the German invasion of Paris. His mother came to the Uuited States after the war and I had the XCVI——689 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE opportunity ther to renew my acquaint- ance with her. When went to serve in the United States Army, I, Betty Carr, used my good Offices in helping to obtain a po- sition with the American Counci!! of Learned Societies in order that she might supplement the income allotted her from her husband's pay. When the war was over and was about to be discharged, I, Robert Carr, rec- ommended him for the position in the De- partment of State which he now holds. In doing this I felt that I was doing the De- partment, as well as , & useful service, not only because I considered @ person with unusual intellectual attainments and emotional and moral stability, but also be- cause I knew that he was deeply grateful to America for the opportunities and security which it offered him and that he would serve the Government of his adopted country with unusual devotion. In the 9 years that we have known the » we have seen them on an average of once a week, except for the period during which was in the Army, and have counted them among our most intimate friends. We have dined together in each other’s homes, we have gone on family pic- nics, we have read the same books, enjoyed together the same music, the same paintings, and the same plays. We were interested in the same ideas Our economic and social philosophies were similar. Since was Russian-born, we were especially interested in his views regarding Soviet developments and would have quickly detected any Communist sympathies, if he had any, no matter how cleverly they might have been concealed, for in a long, intimate relationship there are many unguarded mo- ments when, in words, or gestures, or facial expressions, the deepest thoughts and feel- ings of friends are revealed. We have heard from him, and his parents, about his early childhood !n Russia, particularly during the revolution when his family were refugees. They had nothing in common with revolu- tionists. In analyzing Soviet developments, has, however, been clear-headed and objective. His views on the Soviet Union have not been prejudiced by emotional con- siderations arising from the fact that he was denied the heritage of a native homeland. His intellectual discipline was of too high a standard to have permitted it. He has re- garded Soviet developments in the light of basic soctal forces and world trends. We discussed at great length the signifi- cance of Russia’s turn against Germany and her alinement with the democracies. His view, which, if publicly expressed at the time, would have constituted a serious indiscre- tion, was that the Second World War had come to be, not at all a conflict between two ideologies or ways of life, but, rather, a con- flict between Germany and Rusala for leader- ship of a totalitarian movement (fascism versus communism), leaving the question of totalitarlanism versus democracy to be fought out later between the United States and Russia. He recognized, however, that our choice was to face the prospect of a second bout, against Russia, or run the risk of losing the first bout against Germany, and was ac- cordingly reconciled to our alliance with the Soviet Union. The point is that —————— and his wife, who shared his views, were privately not sympathetic toward Russia at the time when expressions of pro-Soviet sym- pathies were popular. The were not without a sense of humor, however, regarding the Communist experiment in Russia. We recall in particu- lar a book which they lent us, written by two Russians, with the title of “The Little Golden Calf,” the amusing situations in which were based on the corruption and incredible stu- pidity of Soviet officials and administrators. It was a source of delight to that the 10941 book, written in the early twenties by ap- proved Communist authors, achieved such popularity in the Soviet Union that the Gov- ernment, after discovering its subtle satire on. the Soviet regime, was unable to effect its suppression. It is also recalled that among other books which the lent us was a novel of out- standing merit, regarding Soviet Russia, Darkness at Noon, by Koestler, which is the most convincing and devastating commen- tary on the Communist regime which we have read. It is devastating for the reason that although the author, like —_—__—_—-, is able to present with tolerance and under- standing the social grievances which have fostered the rise of communism, he, like ————-, 1s quick to point out with equal objectivity the logical consequences of the Communist philosophy and course of action: namely, the enslavement of the individual, or, if he resists, his extermination. It is perhaps conceivable that unsophisti- cated persons, timpressed only by emotional manifestations, might have, through igno- rance, mistaken intellectual objectivity to- ward Russia as a symptom of Communist sympathy. It is not conceivable, however, that anyone capable of a rational approach to social problems and their solutions could interpret views regarding Russia as anything but deeply and emphatically op- posed to communism and Communists’ activities. We have known ———————_ as a wife and mother, extremely devoted to her husband and children, nd asa highly intelligent per- son interested chiefly in the arts, rather than in political, social, or economic matters. We have observed that in regard to such mat- ters she shares her husband’s views. It would be difficult to belicve that, in view of the exceptionally close and harmonious re- lations between her and her husband, she could hold political views differing substan- tially from those of her husband. I, Betty Carr, have discussed with —————, among other subjects of usual interest to women, problems of child training and care and know that she strongly opposes regi- mentation and tries to encourage in her children the spirit of individualism. She, as well as her husband, believes strongly in the institution of the family and in the tnstitu- tion of private property on which it js in a targe part based. On the basis of our long and intimate re- lationship with , we are con-~ vinced that they are not Communists, that they are not in sympathy with Communist philosophy, objectives, or activities, and that they can be completely trusted as loyal Amer- icans, faithful and devoted to the political, economic, and social principles embodied in the constitution of the United States. In fact, we cannot conceive on what basis their loyalty might be questioned, and are deeply distressed that such a statement as this should be necessary. Rozert M_ Carr. Berry M. Carr. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of October 1948, [SEA ] Leonarp R. Morey, Vice Consul of the United States of America at Paris, France, DarrmovuTH COLLEGE, DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT, Hanover, N. H. Sratz oy New HAMPSHIRE, Oounty of Grafton, ss: AFFIDAVIT J, Arthur M. Wilson, being duly sworn, de- pose and say: In 1939 a friend of mine, a former fellow student in the Harvard graduate school, assured me that I would greatly enjoy mak- ing the acquaintance of one who was in France that summer and whom my
10942 friend had met in France the preceding year. The and we made an appointment, but the outbreak of war prevented our meet- ing as planned. By great coincidence we found ow'selves on the same boat returning to New York, the steamship Roosevelt, which sailed from Pouillac, France, in late Septem- ber i939. The rest of that year I continued to be on leave of absence from Dartmouth College, and from late Decomber of 1939 to Inte March of 1940 my wife and I did research in the Library of Congress. During that time we frequently saw the and we have been in touch with them off and on ever since. I do not recall that we saw each other face to face between March 1940 and 1943 I cer- tainly saw lim once in 1943, when he was about to be inducted and was interviewing people in OSS In the hope of being assigned for service there, and we saw them now and sgain in 1944 and 1945, during which time he was assigned to OSS and was living in Greenbelt ‘““he last time I saw him was when we h.d lunch together at the State Department just after New Year's 10 months ago My pereonal knowledge of and his wife makes me think it extremely unhkely that either of them ever was or is now 4 member of the Communist Party or a Com- munist sympathizer The first days I ever knew —-——, when in 1939 we were on the boat returning to the United Stutes, I remem- ber that he cxpresced repurnance at the idea that the U S S R had invaded Poland. A few months later I was present at a heated argument in which the — defended Fin- land and criticized the U S 8 R for its at- tack on Finland Also during that winter of 1939 1940 I was present at a dinner party with the during which cur host set forth ideas which certainly seemed to me to be antidemocratic in tendency and sym- pathetic to the Fuhrer-Prinzip I remember that vigorously attacked these views, and his defense of democracy, by the way, was framed in concepts that were Jefferso- nian, not Marxist. These were the months of the so-called phony war. I never once heard or his wife defend the Nazi-Soviet pact or suggest that the war was an impertal- istic wer or that it was not our war, or any other of the favorite contentions of Com- munists or Communist sympathizers at that time. I knew the most intimately in these months of 1940, but nevertheless we have been in touch with them by letter and by occasional visits since, and I have never detected in them any change or trend in their point of view That point of view 1s characterized by (1) a deep and Well grounded appreciation of the meaning and value of western European and American culture; (2) an abhorience of totalitarian or police state methods wherever they are to be found; (3) a mode of thought which uses words and concepts which are Jeffersontan-demo- crat! , not Marxian. I have always found —~--— to argue any matter, whether political, literary, or aesthetic, on its merits and not ac- cording to some preconceived, programmatic line of thcught. Moreover, he does not think in terms of the class struggle, or dialectical mateiiailsm, or with any other of the famil- jar Marxian crutches His whole cast of mind is liberal in the western sense, as well as New Deal in the American sense, and it is completely anti-Marxian or non-Marxian, Moreover, I have never detected in either of the anything that would suggest that they were being shifty or deceitful or evasive, or were trying to conceal their renl opinions. I know the working of mind better than that of his wife, but my belief is that the foregoing characterizes the one as well as the other. In short, I have never noticed anything about either of the which would raise the sHghtest suspicion in my mind as to CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE their complete loyalty to this country. is a man who ts intelligent, competent, conscientious, and discieet, I might point out, for instance, that when We saw each other now and again while both of us were with OSS, he acted in a completely security- conscious Manner toward me, as I did to- ward him Ot myself, let me say that I was born at Rural, Rock Island County, Ill, on July 29, 1902, and have lived all my life in this country except for 3 years (1924-1927) when I was a student at the University of Oxford, and ex- cept for a few months in 1939, when I was in France on a Guggenheim Fellowship. I have been at Dartmouth College since 1933, my present title and rank being professor of blugraphy and government From January 3, 1843 to September 1, 1945, I was with OSS at Washington, assigned first to the Current Intelligence Staff of the research and analysis branch, then to the foreign nationalities branch, and finally to the OSS history pro- ject. ARTHUR M WILSON. Subscribed and sworn to before mo this 18th day of October 1948 | SEAL] Donatp L Barr, Notary Public. My commiesion expires January 21, 1949. STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, County of Grafton, ss: AFFIDAVIT I, Julia Mary (‘“olford) Wilson, being duly sworn, depose and say- I first knew in September 1939 when my husband, Prof. Arthur M Wilson, of Dartmouth College, and I were returning from Europe on the same boat as were the I saw her next, and several times, during the perlod from late December of 1939 to late March of 1940 when Mr Wilson and I were resident in Washington while he was doing research in the Library of Con- gress. From then until 1943, I did not see her, and what correspondence passed be- tween the families was extremely casual as far as my relation with her was concerned. In January of 1943, my husband returned to Washington to work with OSS, and some- time during that year we saw the ——-—— once when they came through Washington After ——---——— himself was transferred to OSS, we saw the several times I have ceen neither since I left Washington in September oO: 1945 While I have been very friendly with at such times as our paths have crossed, it cannot be said that we have ever been in- timete friends, However, when one js with the the conversation is confined al- most exclusively to ideas and to intollectual subjects, so that one quickly gets to know the cast of their minds. I soon learned, therefore, that - was an ardent New Dealer, with tastes for the most advanced in art and music. Though I did not com- etely share her enthusiasm on these sub- jects, the four of us were congenial enough to enjoy an occasional evening together The talk was always what is commonly called stimulating, and that was largely because neither of the is hesitant to express an opinion on any topic under discussion. I have no hesitation in saying that ‘ in spite of this willingness to let her views be known, never said anything that would lead me even to suspect that she might be or ever had been a member of the Communist Party. As for her sympathies, I cannot re- member that she ever disagreed with her husband on subjects pertinent to this affi- davit For his views, I would refer you to the statement of my husband about . Returning, as Mr. Wilson and I did, from Europe in late September of 1939, we were thrown with many voluntary but unappre- clative repatriates. This experience made me very sensitive to and hostile toward those JULY 25 who criticized or were unsympathetic to de- mocracy. In fact, I probably might have been described as having become militantly American. I believe, therefore, that I would have been very likely to detect any antl- American attituce in , and am the more convinced that her views were sympa- thetic to mine because I still retain very vivid impressions of others whom I met at that period and who were not enthusiastic believers in democracy As for her trustworthiness, I do not re- member that ever said anything which indicated that she might be indiscreet and inadvertently reveal a military secret if she ever knew one. I say this with the more con- fidence because I myself was very conscious of the problem of security, not only because of my husband's connection with OSS but because I did a good deal of volunteer work at the United Nations Service Center at the Union Station Plaza, where the importance of guarding one’s speech was constantly be- ing impressed upon one. I was born in this country (at Boyd, Chip- pewa County, Wis) of native-born parents, JULIA Mary (ToL¥orD) WILSON. HA? over, N H. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of Octcber 1948 [sta] Donatp L Barr, Notary Public. My commission expires January 21, 1949. To Whom It May Concern’ I, Gerhard E Kadisch, residing at 106 Cook Strect, Bennettsville, S C., and Valley Road, Wachtung, N J, hereby declare that I am & naturalized citizen of the United States of America I was born in Denmark (Copen- hagen). I am at present general manager of Boro Wood Products Co, Inc., Bennettsville, sc I first met in May 1902, in Ber- lin, Germany, in my capacity as general manager of the Goerz Division of Zeiss Ikon A. G., Berlin-Zehlendorf was a nephew of Prof Emmanuel Goldberg who was @ Well-known scientist and managing direc- tor of the Zeiss Ikon A G in Dresden, Ger- many was then employed in the advertising depaitment. In addition to periodic contacts with him in the course of business, I got to know him and his familly socially, as he was a frequent guest at a small social club for the promo- tion and study of the English langunge and literature at which I was an occasional guest speaker. At that time I found Mr. to be a very refined, well-educated, young man, remarkably well versed in literature and art and generally of high intellectual caliber. I occasionally visited his father’s home, The family lived in comfortable circum- stances but I understood that they were at one time wealthy Russian industrialists and that the family had lost most of their possessions durlng the Russian revolution. Mr , Sr. described to me some of the adventurous episodes of his family’s life in Russia and the impression that I got at the time of the family’s political leanings was certainly not that of any sympathy with communism, On the contrary, the atmos- phere was typical of that found in most Russian immigrant families at that time, namely, that of distinct hostility toward the Bolsheviks. In 1933, after Hitler’s coming to power, a particularly radical situation developed in the Zeiss Ikon concern. uncle, the managing director of the company, was sub- jected to brutal Nazi persecution and himself as the nephew of the non-Aryan company head was forced to resign and left the company. I was instrumental in helping him get a job temporarily with the Zeiss subsidiary in Paris, France, and I visited him there in the summer of 1934 in the course of a busi- ness trip to that country. family had