davidaulloa/AmericanStories huggingface dataset:
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01
Naval Inspector General
Refires After Al Years

Rear Admiral j. Cary Jones.
Naval Inspector General since
September. 1852. retires today
after II years active duty.
The admiral. who reached the
statutory retirement age this
month. will retire with the rank
of vice admiral. He will be sue
ceeded by Rear Admiral Stuart
S. Murray, former 14th Naval
District Commandment at Pearl
Harbor.
Born in Huntsville, Ala, in
1892, Admiral Jones is a 1918
Naval Academy graduate. A
veteran of both World Wars, he
was repeatedly decorated for ex-
ceptional and meritorious serv-
ice in both the Atlantic and Pa
cif1c theaters. Before becoming
inspector general he was chief
of the Military Assistance Adj
visory group in the Netherlands.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01
Seal Reelected Chairman
0. D. {. Polio Chapter

Elwood H. Seal. attorney. has
been reelected chairman Of the
District Chapter OF the Founda-
ton for Infantile Paralysis for
his sixth term.
Also reelected at a recent
meeting of the local chapter were
Ford E. Young and Sterling Ely.
vice chairmen; Robert v. Flem-
ing. treasurer; John M. Christie,
assistant treasurer. and Edgar
Morris. secretary. Executive COM
mittee members reelected we're
Sheppard Allen, James L. Martin,
Harry L. Merrick, /. j. Roberts,
DR.. H. S. Robinson, Mrs. Chan
ming s. Walker and Martin T.
Wiegand.
DR.. Carl Berg and DR.. Milton
c. Cobey were Te-appointed
chairman and vice chairman. re-
spectively. of the Medical Ad-
visoEy Committee.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01
Good Friday Observance
Set for ; Hours April 10

The Washington area again
will solemnly commemorate
Good Friday on April Is from
noon to 3 pm. the Committee
for Three Hours Observance OF
Good Friday announced today.
Congress has been asked to
recess on Good Friday. and bust
ness and professional groups
have been asked to permit their
employees to attend church serv-
ices that day.
The movement began in the
District 10 years ago. This
years announcement says that,
with each succeeding year.
more people are learning the
true significance of Christ's
loving sacrifice on the cross for
the benefit of all men,"
The Rev. George M. Docheyty.
minister Of the New York Ave-
nue. Presbyterian Church, is
chairman.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01
BY The Assoeiosed Press

A congressional group charged
today that the Army. with, ''in-
excusaDle disregard" for tax
money. had wheedled SOB mil
lion from Congress in four years
for "overcoats which it did not
need and did not buy"
Now. four years later, a House
Government Operations subcom-
mittee said. the Army does not
know how the money was spent.
The subcommittee said it was
$50 disturbed by the findings
that it called on the Controller
General and the Pentagon to
make sure it's accounting system
hows whether appropriated
funds are being spent the way
Congress orders.
The subcommittee, headed by
Representative Riehlman, Re-
publican. of New York, issued a
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01

mentioning the previous con-
tract. This led to total Of sos
million which was appropriated.
The overcoat subsequently was
dropped. After Korean hostili-
ties began. the Army paid $102
million for 1906, 504 of the new
coats. But subcommittee officials
said the money came from other
funds.
The subcommittee said the
Army explained it could not de-
termine the amount of the over
coat funds because they were
Jumped into a general item for
clothing.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01
Monnet Soils for U. S.,
Seeks Cool Steel Loon
By The As,ocio,ed pr.,,

CHERBoURG, France, April
Jean Monnet. president of
the European Coal and Steel
Community, sailed yesterday
aboard the liner Queen Eliza.
beth for the United States.
Mr.. Monnet is seeking a Unit
ed States loan for the commu-
nifty with which to finance in
vestments aimed at stepping up
the development of the coal
steel pool.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-04-01
St. Agnes School PIuy

The Land of Beba-buk- buk
will be presented at 3 pm. Sat-
urday in the st. Agnes School for
Girls in Alexandria by the Tails
man Marionettes. The show is
being sponsored by the st. Agnes
Alumnae Association as their
opening event for the st. Agnes
fund drive.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

DIR. Oppenheimer. in his an
swering letter of March 4, 1854.
before the hearings began. said:
Shortly after that event (the
Russian atomic explosion, in
October, 1949, the Atomic Energy
Commission called a special ses-
sion of the General Advisory
Committee ano asked us to con-
slider and advise on two related
questions: first. whether in view
of the Soviet success the COM
missions program was adequate.
and if not. in what way it should
be altered or increased; second,
whether a crash program for
the development of the Super
should b. a part of any new
program"
And from beginning to end of
the hearings. his testimony was
consistently the same on this
point. On the second day of the
hearings, during his direct exam
ination, DR. Oppenheimer testi-
fed:
THE General Advisory Com
mittee was called to meet in
Washington, and met On two
questions which were obviously
related. The first was. was the
commission doing what it ought
to be doing? Were there other
things which it should now be
undertaking in the light of the
Soviet explosion?
"The second was the special
case of this: was crash develop
ment, the most rapid possible de-
velopment and construction of a
Super among the things that the
commission ought to be doing?"
The question of producing a
hydrogen bomb as rapidly as
possible was very much in the
air during a considerable time
before the October 30 meeting.
Thus, on October IA the Joint
Chiefs met with the Joint Con-
gressional Committee on Atomic
Energy, and Gen. Vanderberg,
for the Joint Chiefs, urged the
development of the H-bomb;
this was followed on October II
by letter from the Joint Con-
gressional Committee to the A.
E. c. requesting further infor-
nation on the Super. A copy of
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

this letter went to the Military
LiaiSon Committee and some
where around October q there
was a joint meeting Of the Acc
and the Military LiaiSon Com
mittee at which. according to
Gen. Wilson'S testimony. "the
commission announced that it
had asked the General Advisory
Committee to consider the Super
weapon in the light of recent
developments" Earlier, on Octo-
Der IA, the chairman of the
Military Liaison Committee had
gone to see DR.. Oppenheimer at
Princeton with Gen. Mccormack.
the head of Aces Division
of Military Applications, and
with DR.. Manley, the secretary
of the GAO, who was also
associate director at Los AlamoS:
at Princeton they discussed with
DR.. Oppenheimer "the Super and
other problems to be taken up
by the General Advisory Com
mittee."
All of the evidence leaves no
doubt as to the fact that the
question before the G. A. C. was
whether or not the United States
should undertake an about pro-
gram for the development of a
hydrogen bomb, just as DR.. OPP
penheimer had stated, beginning
with his answer and throughout
his testimony.
Gid WHY NOTA
MIDDLE COURSE?
So far as we can tell from
their Report, the Board majority
seems to- suggest at this point
that DR.. Oppenheimer failed to
reveal with candor the G. A. C.'s
opposition not merely to q crash
program but to any program for
the development of a hydrogen
bomb. because the G. A. C. coulS
have recommended. but did cot,
a middle course" between an
"all-out effort and no effort at
ALL"
DR.. Oppenheimer in his testi-
mony. however. made it quite
clear that the opposition was not
just to a crash program, but
was essentially to the whole hy-
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

different stages of the history Of
the H-bomb program.
We shall take these up in or
der.
ta) DR.. Oppenheimer's OppOSi-
ton to the Crash Program
in the Autumn of 1919.
The majority described what
they felt to be DR.. Oppenheimer's
lack of candor in this connection
as follows:
DIR. Oppenheimer testified that
what he was opposing in the fall
of 1949 was only a crash pro-
gram in the development and
production of thermometer
weapons. In this connection, DR..
Oppenheimer contended that the
main question relating to Their
monuclear weapons presented to
the G. A. C. at its meeting of
October 20. 1949. was whether or
not the United States should un-
dertake such a crash program.
The board does not believe that
DR.. Oppenheimer was entirely
candid with the board in at
tempting to establish this i'm
preston. The record reflect that
DR.. Oppenheimer expressed the
opinion in writing that the super
bomb should neUer be produced,
and that the commitment to this
effect should be unqualified.
Moreover. the alternatives avail
able to the G. A. c. were not a
choice between an all out effort
and no effort at all; there was a
middle course which might have
been considered. (italics added
by petitioner.)
We have italicized the three
phrases whose significance it
seems necessary to discuss.
Clearly the majority doubted DR..
Oppenheimer's statement that
the main question" presented to
the GAO at the October 1949
meeting was whether or not to
undertake a crash program. Just
why the majority doubted the
candor of this statement is not
at all clear. AS will appear be-
low, there was much other teSti-
mony besides DR. Oppenheimer's
to the same effect and none to
the contrary. We shall first sum-
Marie this testimony and then
proceed to a consideration of the
evidence. relating to the other
two UNDERSIGNED phrases, after
which we think it will become
clear to the commission that DR.
Oppenheimer's testimony was
candid throughout.
ID WAS THE MAIN QUESTION
AT THE OCTOBER MEET
ING WHETHER OR NOT TO
UNDERTAKE A CRASH PRO-
GRAM?
1t is difficult to understand, in
the light of the record, how any
question of candor could arise
about what was the main ques-
ton presented to the October
1949 meeting relating to thermo-
nuclear weapons.
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

drogen bomb program Except
for continuing research and ex.
ploration). On direct examina-
ton on the second day of the
hearings. before any cross. ex-
animation, DR.. Oppenheimer
said:
"Tne real reason, the weight,
behind the report is. in my opin-
ion, a feeling that the existence
Of these weapons would be q dis
advantageous thing. 1t says
this over and over again"
He then quoted from the mi
nority annex Of Fermi and Rabi
as follows:
"The fact that no limits exist
to the destructiveneSS of this
weapon makes its very existence
and the knowledge Of its con-
struction q danger to humanity
as a whole. It is necessarily an
evil thing considered in any light.
For these reasons. we believe it
important for the President OF
the United States to tell the
American public and the world
that we think it wrong on funda-
mental ethical principles to ini-
tiate the development of such a
weapon.
The majority annex expressed
in somewhat different terms Q
related concern:
I'm determining not to proceed
to develop the super bomb. we
see a unique opportunity Of pro-
viding by example some limita.
lions on the totality of war and
thus of eliminating the fear and
arousing the hope of mankind.
DR.. Oppenheimer testified:
ct think it is very clear that
the objection was that we did
not like the weapon. not that it
couldn't be made
Surely there is no want of can
dor in tire foregoing testimony.
And as to Clle possibility of a
middle course" again there is
no inconsistency in DR.. Open
heimer's testimony, or any con.
tradiction of it by anyone. DR..
Oppenheimer freely conceded
Continued on Page A-9, Col. ID
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

Of the other @. A. c. members,
there is no basis for Supposing
that If DR.. Oppenheimer'S advice
had been in favor of proceeding,
the time of elaboration would
have been any shorter.
AS to the question whether in
fact it would have been possible
to have accomplished anything
much earlier, we submit that the
most comprehensive and objec-
tive testimony was that OF DR..
Bradbury, who concluded, from
his intimate knowledge, OF both
the thermometer and the
atomic weapons programs. which
were inter-related. that the de-
yelopment could not as a prac-
tical matter have come before it
did, barring perhaps the possi-
bility that some strokes OF genius
might have occurred q little
earlier if all efforts had been
concentrated on the thermonu-
clear program. DR.. Bradbury's
testimony is summarized at page
81 of the Brief to the Board.
which contains references also,
on the subject of delay" to the
testimony of DR.. Teller, DR.. Ram
sey and DR.. Bethe.
We turn next to a discussion
of the fourth controlling con-
sideration" cited by the major
ity of the board for concluding
that the reinstatement of DR..
Oppenheimer's clearance would
not be clearly consistent with
the security interests Of the
United States.
CANDOR.
eve regretfully concluded that
DR.. Oppenheimer has been less
than candid in several instances
in his testimony before this
board"
OF the items on which the
board has criticized DR.. Open
heimer, this is the most disturb
ing to a man of honor. It is also
the most difficult to meet be-
cause it is. after all, the state
ment of a subjective impression.
We regret that two members
of tine board should have derived
that subjective impression. We
point out that the third member
of the board got wholly differ
ent impression. DR.. Evans said:
'His statements in cross ex-
animation show him to be still
naive, but extremely honest and
such statements work to his
benefit in my estimation.
/ We shall consider now the
several instances" which the
board pointed to as involving
lack of candor. Each of these
instances relates to DR.. Open
heimer's testimony about the
hydrogen bomb. The first in
stance had to do with DR.. OPP
penheimer's opposition to a
crash program" in the fall of
1919; the second had to do with
the degree of his influence; and
the third with his attitudes at
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

position undoubtedly had an
effect upon other scientists"
= y
Quite apart from these facts,
we cannot believe that the COM
mission will approve the prece-
dent of injecting into a security
case scientists alleged lack Of
enthusiasm for particular pro-
gram. How can a scientist risk
advising the Government if he
knows that at some later day a
security board may weigh in the
balance the degree of his support
for some official policy, after
finding him to be loyal and hon.
est in his motivations? Or that
he may be held accountable for a
failure to let the scientific COM
munity know that he has aban-
doned his earlier opposition to
some particular policy?
(b) Alleged Departure From His
Role as Scientific Adviser.
In the paragraph in which DR..
Oppenheimer is criticized for de-
parting from his role as a scien-
tific adviser, the majority dis
claimed any intention to try DR..
Oppenheimer for his opinions;
yet the effect of their conclusion
inescapably involved a Judgment
about the nature and the content
Of the views he held and ex-
pressed.
The criticisms here are of two
sorts: The giving of non-technical
advice, and the giving of advice
not thought to be sufficiently ia
vorable to the strongest often
Sive military interests of the
country. These criticisms are
made in spite of the fact that
DR.. Oppenheimer's opinions were
shared by other competent and
devoted individuals, both in and
out of Government" and in
spite of the assumption that the
opinions were "motivated by
deep moral conviction. The
board seems to feel that the only
convictions which a scientific adj
wiser is entitled to express with
out becoming a security risk are
ID those confined to technical
matters, and 90 those calcu-
lated to protect the strongest
offensive military interests of
the country. Surely a security
system as rigid. restrictive and
combining as the majority seems
to favor would be unavoidable in
practice; no self-respecting
scientist could live with it and
no board could be wise enough
to administer it.
Types of Advice Cited.
Apart from the question of
principle involved, the facts of
record do not support the major
ity'S criticisms of DR.. Oppenhei-
mer. Ia the first place, DR.. OPP
penheimer was careful to sepa-
rate his technical advice from
the non-technical. In particu-
lar, the GAS General Adj
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

visory Committee to the COM
mission) report Of October. 1949,
consisted of a report proper and
two annexes. The report proper
was essentially technical in
character. The political and
policy considerations were dealt
with essentially in the two an
nexeS, evidently because there
was some feeling that they
might not belong in the report
proper. The report proper did
contain at least three sentences
which were not technical. but
they were clearly and obviously
not technical so that no one
could have been IniSled.
(c) Alleged Effect of DIR. Open
heimer's Opposition to the
Program in Delaying the Ini-
tiatiOn Of Concerted Effort for
the Development of a ThermO-
nuclear Weapon.
4 y 4 +
Though all persons familiar
with the atomic energy pro-
gram, including the military.
knew about the theoretical pos
sibility of a hydrogen bomb and
knew that research on it was
going on, even the Strategic Air
Communicative branch of the
Government most interested in
the largest possible weapons
was not urging a concerted effort
toward the development of the
hydrogen bomb before the Rus
sian atomic bomb explosion of
late September 1919. Special
counsel for the commission
called as a witness General VIII
son of the Air Force, who de-
Scribed himself as a dedicated
air man." FIRST of all big bomb
man." a believer "in the theories
of Douet and Mitchell and Ad-
miral Mahan as modified to fit
the present war;" Gen. Wilson
testified that it was the Russian
A-bomb explosion of September
%, 1949 that I really think
spanked off the military interest
in this larger weapon"
So that if DR.. Oppenheimer is
to be charged with some part in
delaying the initiation of the
concerted effort which led to the
development of a thermometer
weapon, it must be related to
the fourth-month period from
October 20, 1949, when the
G. A. C. made it's report. to jan
uary 20, 1850, when the Presi-
dent made his decision. But
these months cannot properly
be considered as a delay" nor
ascribed to DR.. Oppenheimer. 1t
was a short enough. period at
best in which to consider the
momentous issues which were in
volved, and in view of the d.
vision of opinion within the
A. E. c. and the State Depart
ment (aS evidenced by Ambassa-
dor Remnants attitude), to say
nothing of the very strong views
Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-06-16

Following Is a partial list OF
the main portion OF the brief on
behalf of Or. J. Robert Open
heimer filed Nth the Atomic
Energy Commission.
ANALYSIS OF THE VIEW OF
THE MAJORITY OF THE
PERSONNEL SECURITY
BOARD
In recommending against rein
statement of DR.. Oppenheimer's
clearance, the majority of the
board cited four considerations
as controlling, namely:
81. We find that DR.. Open
heimer's continuing conduct
and associations have reflected
a serious disregard for the re-
quirements of the security
system.
"2. We have found a SuScepti-
bility to influence which could
have serious implications for
the security interests of the
country.
-. We find his conduct in the
hydrogen bomb program Suf-
ficiently disturbing as to raise
a doubt as to whether his flu
ture participation, if charac-
terized by the same attitudes
in a Government program re-
lating to the national defense,
would be clearly consistent
with the best interests of Sc
curity.
-. We have regretfully con-
cluded that DR.. Oppenheimer
has been less than candid in
several instances in his tes-
timony before this board"
We propose to take up first
findings 3 and 4, which relate
to the H-bomb program.
X II
THE H-BOMB PROGRAM.
Ia Alleged Lack of Enthusiastic
Support for the Program
AS to this, the board state:
I'VE cannot dismiss the matter
Of DR.. Oppenheimer's relation
ship to the development of the
hydrogen bomb simply with the
finding that his conduct was not
motivated by disloyalty, because
it is our conclusion that, what
ever the motivation, the security
interests of the United States
were effected
1--WE believe that. had DR.. OPP
penheimer given his enthusiastic
support to the program, a con-
certed effort would have been
initiated at an earlier date.
Following the Presidents de-
cision, he did not show the en-
thusiastic support for the pro-
gram which might have been
expected of the chief atomic adj
wiser to the Government under
the circumstances. Indeed, a
failure to communicate an
abandonment of his earlier
Arizona sun., 1954-02-05

The public is invited to attend a
program sponsored by the Phoenix
United States Committee for
UNICEF, on which one hundred
and seventy children will sing, play
games, and dance, Monday, Febru-
ary s, 8 pm. at Temple Beth
Israel, Flower and 18th Avenue.
UNICEF is the United Nations
Children's Fund.
Church and civic groups, Indian
School and Creighton Schools 9Th
grade class, Phoenix Chapter
AAUN, Clone Dance Studios and
individuals are cooperating with
the committee.
Ralph Hess, Elementary School
Music Director will direct the
songs and Mrs. Clarence Jones,
the games; Mrs. Nina Snalley de-
signing costumes: and Mrs. Earle
Brown, accompanist for songs.
Miss Edith Champan is directing a
feature part of one some. A play
on UNICEF,-"A Heart Throb
Around the World''- written by
Stephen Shadegg and directed by
Mrs. William Shupe will end the
evenings performance. The Very
Rev. James w. F. Carmon, Dean
of Trinity Episcopal Church will
be Master of Ceremonies.
Children from First Institutional
Baptist Church, Tanner Chapel,
and Wesley Methodist Church will
be in the chorus under Mr.. Hess.
They are: Earle and Bennie Whit
more from Wesley Methodist
Church; Patricia Grant, Laverne
Swain, Dorene Raye, Rosa Graves,
Phyllis Hasker, Jacquelynne Las
ter, Roberta Lewis, Sherry Weeden,
Mary Ann CrOthers, Cornella
Moore, and Beatrice Williams,
Arizona sun., 1954-02-05
BUTTER OWNED BY
USDA TO BE SOLD

Butter owned by the United
States Department of Agriculture
will be offered for sale on COM
petitive bid basis. 1t will be used as
cocoa butter substitute, says
Thomas M. Stubblefield, extension
economist at the University of Ari
zona. The sale of the butter is part
of an experimental program to de-
velop new uses for dOmestically
produced agricultural products.
Primarily, cocoa butter is used
in the manufacture of chocolate
and chocolate confectionery pro-
ducts. 1t is produced from cocoa
beans which are in short world
supply. Several years will be re-
quired before production of the
beans may meet world require
mentS.
Arizona sun., 1954-02-05
Bakers
Funeral To Be
Saturday

The funeral services of Mr.. Les
lie Baker, "a, of 1888 w. MOhave,
will be held Saturday morning at
Mt. Calvary Baptist Church at
1000 o'clock. Rev. c. N. Hall will
officate.
Mr.. Baker died last Tuesday in
a local hospital following a long
illness He was a native of Texas,
came to Phoenix in 1899, was a
member of Mt Calvary Baptist
Church.
He is survived by his wife,
Nellie of Phoenix; son. Evry, Los
Angeles; two sisters, Adline Nor
gan, Oklahoma City, and Birdie
Moore, Los Angeles; 2 grandchil-
dren, Edgar and William Louis,
Los Angeles.
Interment in Greenwood Memo
rial Park with Ragsdale Mortuary
in charge.