EXECUTIVE SESSIONS OF THE SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS ======================================================================= VOLUME 1 __________ EIGHTY-THIRD CONGRESS FIRST SESSION 1953 MADE PUBLIC JANUARY 2003 Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs ________ U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 83-869 WASHINGTON : 2003 ____________________________________________________________________________ For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free<PHONE_NUMBER>;<PHONE_NUMBER> Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER> Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 107th Congress, Second Session JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman CARL LEVIN, Michigan FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TED STEVENS, Alaska RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio MAX CLELAND, Georgia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah MARK DAYTON, Minnesota JIM BUNNING, Kentucky PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Staff Director and Counsel Richard A. Hertling, Minority Staff Director Darla D. Cassell, Chief Clerk ------ PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois TED STEVENS, Alaska ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio MAX CLELAND, Georgia THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah MARK DAYTON, Minnesota JIM BUNNING, Kentucky PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois Elise J. Bean, Staff Director and Chief Counsel Kim Corthell, Minority Staff Director Mary D. Robertson, Chief Clerk COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 83rd Congress, First Session JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, Minnesota HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan ALTON A. LENNON, North Carolina Francis D. Flanagan, Chief Counsel Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk ------ PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS JOSEPH R. McCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas \1\ EVERETT McKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington \1\ CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri \1\ Roy M. Cohn, Chief Counsel Francis P. Carr, Executive Director Ruth Young Watt, Chief Clerk assistant counsels Robert F. Kennedy Donald A. Surine Thomas W. La Venia Jerome S. Adlerman Donald F. O'Donnell C. George Anastos Daniel G. Buckley investigators Robert J. McElroy Herbert S. Hawkins James N. Juliana G. David Schine, Chief Consultant Karl H. W. Baarslag, Director of Research Carmine S. Bellino, Consulting Accountant La Vern J. Duffy, Staff Assistant ---------- \1\ The Democratic members were absent from the subcommittee from July 10, 1953 to January 25, 1954. C O N T E N T S ---------- Page Volume 1 Preface.......................................................... xi Introduction..................................................... xiii Russell W. Duke, January 15...................................... 1 Testimony of Russell W. Duke. Russell W. Duke, January 16...................................... 33 Testimony of Edward P. Morgan. Stockpiling in General Services Administration, January 26....... 97 Testimony of George Willi; and Maxwell H. Elliott. Stockpiling of Strategic Materials, January 29................... 121 Testimony of Downs E. Hewitt. File Destruction in Department of State, January 26.............. 143 Testimony of John E. Matson. File Destruction in Department of State, January 27.............. 177 Testimony of Helen B. Balog. File Destruction in Department of State, January 28.............. 207 Testimony of Malvina M. Kerr; and Vladimir I. Toumanoff. File Destruction in Department of State, January 29.............. 283 Testimony of Robert J. Ryan; and Mansfield Hunt. Payment for Influence--Gas Pipeline Matter, January 26........... 321 Testimony of Eugene H. Cole. Payment for Influence--Gas Pipeline Matter, January 27........... 337 Testimony of Eugene H. Cole. Payment for Influence--Gas Pipeline Matter, February 7........... 349 Testimony of Clyde Austin; O.V. Wells; and John W. Carlisle. Payment for Influence--Gas Pipeline Matter, March 3.............. 379 Testimony of Vernon Booth Lowrey. Payment for Influence--Gas Pipeline Matter, March 24............. 393 Testimony of James M. Bryant. Violation of Export Control Statutes, February 2................. 411 Testimony of E.L. Kohler. Voice of America, February 13.................................... 457 Testimony of Lewis J. McKesson; Virgil H. Fulling; Edwin Kretzmann; and Howard Fast. Voice of America, February 14.................................... 499 Testimony of Lewis J. McKesson; James M. Moran; George Q. Herrick; Newbern Smith; Stuart Ayers; Larry Bruzzese; and Nancy Lenkeith. Voice of America--Transmission Facilities, February 16........... 577 Testimony of Wilson R. Compton; and General Frank E. Stoner. Voice of America, February 17.................................... 599 Testimony of Harold C. Vedeler. Voice of America, February 23.................................... 615 Testimony of Nathaniel Weyl; Donald Henderson; Alfred Puhan; James F. Thompson; and Reed Harris. Voice of America, February 24.................................... 715 Testimony of W. Bradley Connors. Voice of America, February 28.................................... 719 Testimony of Fernand Auberjonois; Norman Stanley Jacobs; Raymond Gram Swing; and Troup Mathews. Voice of America, March 3........................................ 765 Testimony of Jack B. Tate. Voice of America, March 7........................................ 769 Testimony of Mrs. William Grogan; and Dorothy Fried. Voice of America, March 10....................................... 795 Testimony of David Cushman Coyle; John Francis McJennett, Jr.; and Robert L. Thompson. Voice of America, March 16....................................... 881 Testimony of Charles P. Arnot. Loyalty Board Procedures, March 18............................... 903 Testimony of John H. Amen. Volume 2 State Department Information Service--Information Centers, March 23....................................................... 913 Testimony of Mary M. Kaufman; Sol Auerbach (James S. Allen); and William Marx Mandel. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, March 24....................................................... 945 Testimony of Samuel Dashiell Hammett; Helen Goldfrank; Jerre G. Mangione; and James Langston Hughes. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, March 25....................................................... 999 Testimony of Mary Van Kleeck; and Edwin Seaver. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, March 31....................................................... 1015 Testimony of Edward W. Barrett. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, April 1........................................................ 1045 Testimony of Dan Mabry Lacy. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, April 24....................................................... 1071 Testimony of James A. Wechsler--published in 1953. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, April 28....................................................... 1073 Testimony of Theodore Kaghan. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, May 5. 1115 Testimony of James A. Wechsler--published in 1953. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, May 5. 1117 Testimony of Millen Brand. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, May 6. 1123 Testimony of John L. Donovan. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, May 13 1135 Testimony of James Aronson; and Cedric Belfrage. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, May 19 1161 Testimony of Julien Bryan. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, July 1 1193 Testimony of Richard O. Boyer; Rockwell Kent; Edwin B. Burgum; Joseph Freeman; George Seldes; and Doxey Wilkerson. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, July 2 1217 Testimony of Allan Chase. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, July 7 1223 Testimony of Eslanda Goode Robeson; Arnaud d'Usseau; and Leo Huberman. State Department Information Service--Information Centers, July 14............................................................. 1231 Testimony of Harvey O'Connor. State Department Teacher-Student Exchange Program, May 20........ 1235 Testimony of Naphtali Lewis. State Department Teacher-Student Exchange Program, May 25........ 1245 Testimony of Helen B. Lewis; Naphtali Lewis; and Margaret Webster. State Department Teacher-Student Exchange Program, May 26........ 1267 Testimony of Aaron Copland. State Department Teacher-Student Exchange Program, June 8........ 1291 Testimony of Rachel Davis DuBois; and Dr. Dorothy Ferebee. State Department Teacher-Student Exchange Program, June 19....... 1305 Testimony of Clarence F. Hiskey. State Department Teacher-Student Exchange Program, June 19....... 1311 Testimony of Harold C. Urey. Trade with Soviet-Bloc Countries, May 20......................... 1321 Trade with Soviet-Bloc Countries, May 25......................... 1329 Testimony of Charles S. Thomas; Louis W. Goodkind; Thruston B. Morton; Kenneth R. Hansen; and Vice Admiral Walter S. Delaney. Austrian Incident, June 3........................................ 1349 Testimony of V. Frank Coe. Austrian Incident, June 5........................................ 1367 Testimony of V. Frank Coe. Communist Party Activities, Western Pennsylvania, June 17........ 1373 Testimony of Louis Bortz; and Herbert S. Hawkins. Communist Party Activities, Western Pennsylvania, June 18........ 1395 Testimony of Louis Bortz. Special Meeting, July 10......................................... 1399 Alleged Bribery of State Department Official, July 13............ 1415 Testimony of Juan Jose Martinez-Locayo. Internal Revenue, July 31........................................ 1431 Testimony of T. Coleman Andrews. Security--Government Printing Office, August 10.................. 1439 Testimony of Mary S. Markward; Edward M. Rothschild; Esther Rothschild; and James B. Phillips. Security--Government Printing Office, August 11.................. 1473 Testimony of Frederick Sillers; Gertrude Evans; and Charles Gift. Security--Government Printing Office, August 11.................. 1497 Testimony of Raymond Blattenberger; and Phillip L. Cole. Security--Government Printing Office, August 12.................. 1515 Testimony of Ernest C. Mellor; and S. Preston Hipsley. Security--Government Printing Office, August 13.................. 1527 Testimony of Irving Studenberg. Security--Government Printing Office, August 13.................. 1533 Testimony of Gertrude Evans; and Charles Gift. Security--Government Printing Office, August 14.................. 1547 Testimony of Howard Merold; Jack Zucker; Howard Koss; and Isadore Kornfield. Security--Government Printing Office, August 15.................. 1563 Testimony of Cleta Guess; James E. Duggan; and Adolphus Nichols Spence. Security--Government Printing Office, August 18.................. 1573 Testimony of Roy Hudson Wells, Jr.; and Phillip Fisher. Security--Government Printing Office, August 19.................. 1577 Testimony of Joseph E. Francis; Samuel Bernstein; and Roscoe Conkling Everhardt. Security--Government Printing Office, August 21.................. 1595 Testimony of Florence Fowler Lyons. Security--Government Printing Office, August 29.................. 1603 Testimony of Alfred L. Fleming; Carl J. Lundmark; Earl Cragg; and Harry Falk. Stockpiling and Metal Program, August 21......................... 1615 Statement of Robert C. Miller. Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, August 31.... 1625 Testimony of Doris Walters Powell; Francesco Palmiero; and Albert E. Feldman. Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, September 1.. 1651 Testimony of Cpt. Donald Joseph Kotch; Stanley Garber; Jacob W. Allen; Deton J. Brooks, Jr.; Col. Ralph M. Bauknight; Doris Walters Powell; Francesco Palmiero; Marvel Cooke; and Paul Cavanna. Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, September 2.. 1695 Testimony of Mary Columbo Palmiero; Col. Wallace W. Lindsay; Col. Wendell G. Johnson; Maj. Harold N. Krau; Louis Francis Budenz; Augustin Arrigo; and Muriel Silverberg. Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, September 3.. 1729 Testimony of John Stewart Service; Donald Joseph Kotch; Michael J. Lynch; and Jacob W. Allen. Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, September 8.. 1745 Testimony of H. Donald Murray. Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, September 9.. 1777 Testimony of Alexander Naimon; John Lautner; Esther Leenov Ferguson. Volume 3 Security--United Nations, September 14........................... 1807 Testimony of Julius Reiss; and Florence Englander. Security--United Nations, September 15........................... 1833 Testimony of Paul Crouch; Dimitri Varley; Abraham Unger; and Alice Ehrenfeld. Security--United Nations, September 16........................... 1877 Testimony of Frank Cernrey; and Helen Matousek. Security--United Nations, September 17........................... 1889 Testimony of Abraham Unger; Vachel Lofek; and David M. Freedman. Communist Infiltration in the Army, September 21................. 1899 Testimony of Igor Bogolepov; Vladimir Petrov; Gen. Richard C. Partridge; and Samuel McKee. Communist Infiltration in the Army, September 23................. 1913 Testimony of Louis Budenz; Harriett Moore Gelfan; and Corliss Lamont. Korean War Atrocities, October 6................................. 1923 Testimony of Edward J. Lyons, Jr.; Lt. Col. Lee H. Kostora; Maj. James Kelleher; Lt. Col. J. W. Whitehorne, III; Gen. Fenn; and John Adams. Korean War Atrocities, October 31................................ 1943 Korean War Atrocities, November 30............................... 1965 Testimony of 1st Lt. Henry J. McNichols, Jr.; Sgt. Barry F. Rhoden; Capt. Linton J. Buttrey; Sgt. Carey H. Weinel; Col. James M. Hanley; Pfc. John E. Martin; Capt. Alexander G. Makarounis. Korean War Atrocities, December 1................................ 2043 Testimony of Lt. Col. John W. Gorn; Lt. Col. James T. Rogers; Cpl. Lloyd D. Kreider; Sgt. Robert L. Sharps; William L. Milano; Sgt. Wendell Treffery; Sgt. George J. Matta; Cpl. Willie L. Daniels; Sgt. John L. Watters, Jr.; Sgt. Orville R. Mullins; and Donald R. Brown. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 8........... 2119 Statements of Paul Siegel; Jerome Corwin; Allen J. Lovenstein; Edward J. Fister; William P. Goldberg; and Jerome Rothstein. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 9........... 2201 Statements of Alan Sterling Gross; Dr. Fred B. Daniels; Bernard Lipel; James Evers; Sol Bremmer; Murray Miller; Sherwood Leeds; Paul M. Leeds. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 12.......... 2275 Statements of Louis Volp; William Patrick Lonnie; Henry F. Burkhard; Marcel Ullmann; and Herbert F. Hecker. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 12.......... 2303 Testimony of Marcel Ullmann; Morris Keiser; Seymour Rabinowitz; Rudolph C. Riehs; and Carl Greenblum. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 13.......... 2329 Testimony of Joseph Levitsky; William Ludwig Ullman; Bernard Martin; Louis Kaplan; Harry Donohue; Jack Frolow; Bernard Lewis; and Craig Crenshaw. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 14.......... 2389 Testimony of Harold Ducore; Aaron H. Coleman; Samuel Pomerentz; and Haym G. Yamins. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 14.......... 2457 Testimony of Harold Ducore; Jack Okun; and Maj. Gen. Kirke B. Lawton. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 15.......... 2487 Testimony of Vivian Glassman Pataki; Eleanor Glassman Hutner; Samuel I. Greenman; Ira J. Katchen; Max Elitcher; Eugene E. Hutner; Col. John V. Mills; Maj. James J. Gallagher; Marcel Ullmann; Benjamin Zuckerman; and Benjamin Bookbinder. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 16.......... 2563 Testimony of Maj. Gen. Kirke Lawton; Maj. Gen. George I. Back; Maj. Jenista; Col. Ferry; John Pernice; Karl Gerhard; Carl Greenblum; Markus Epstein; and Leo M. Miller. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 17.......... 2625 Testimony of Alfred C. Walker; Joseph Levitsky; and Louis Antell. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 22.......... 2649 Testimony of Fred Joseph Kitty; Jack Okun; Aaron Coleman; and Barry S. Bernstein. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 22.......... 2697 Testimony of Benjamin Wolman; Harvey Sachs; Leonard E. Mins; and Sylvia Berke. Volume 4 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 23.......... 2729 Testimony of Sidney Glassman; David Ayman; Lawrence Freidman; Elba Chase Nelson; Herbert S. Bennett; Joseph H. Percoff; Lawrence Aguimbau; and Perry Seay. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 26.......... 2777 Statements of Benjamin Zuckerman; Hans Inslerman; Thomas K. Cookson; Doris Seifert; Lafayette Pope; Ralph Iannarone; Saul Finkelstein; Abraham Lepato; Irving Rosenheim; and Richard Jones, Jr. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 27.......... 2815 Statements of Edward Brody; Max Katz; Henry Jasik; Capt. Benjamin Sheehan; Russell Gaylord Ranney; Susan Moon; Peter Rosmovsky; and Sarah Omanson. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, October 30.......... 2851 Statements of Harold Ducore; Stanley R. Rich; Nathan Sussman; Louis Leo Kaplan; Carl Greenblum; Sherrod East; Jacob Kaplan; James P. Scott; Bernard Lee; and Melvin M. Morris. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 2.......... 2893 Statements of William Johnston Jones; Murray Nareell; Samuel Sack; Joseph Bert; Raymond Delcamp; Leo Fary; and Irving Stokes. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 3.......... 2919 Testimony of Abraham Chasanow; Joseph H. Percoff; Solomon Greenberg; Isadore Solomon; William Saltzman; and Samuel Sack. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 4.......... 2953 Testimony of Victor Rabinowitz; Wendell Furry; Diana Wolman; Abraham Brothman; Norman Gaboriault; Harvey Sachs; Sylvia Berke; and Benjamin Wolman. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 5.......... 3033 Testimony of Harry Hyman; Vivian Glassman Pataki; Gunnar Boye; Alexander Hindin; Samuel Paul Gisser; Stanley Berinsky; Ralph Schutz; and Henry Shoiket. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 16......... 3083 Testimony of Rear Admiral Edward Culligan Forsyth; Samuel Snyder; Ernest Pataki; Albert Socol; Joseph K. Crevisky; Ignatius Giardina; and Leon Schnee. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 17......... 3125 Testimony of James Weinstein; Harry Grundfest; Harry Pastorinsky; Emery Pataki; and Charles Jassik. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, November 25......... 3151 Testimony of Morris Savitt; Albert Fischler; James J. Matles; Bertha Singer; and Terry Rosenbaum. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 10......... 3171 Testimony of Michael Sidorovich; and Ann Sidorovich. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 10......... 3175 Statement of Samuel Levine. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 14......... 3199 Testimony of Albert Shadowitz; Pvt. David Linfield; Shirley Shapiro; and Sidney Stolbert. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 15......... 3221 Testimony of Ezekiel Heyman; Lester Ackerman; Sigmond Berger; Ruth Levine; Bennett Davies; John D. Saunders; Norman Spiro; Carter Lemuel Burkes; John R. Simkovich; Linda Gottfried; Joseph Paul Komar; John Anthony DeLuca; and Sam Morris. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 16......... 3273 Testimony of Wilbur LePage; Martin Levine; John Schickler; David Lichter; Albert Burrows; Seymour Butensky; and Kenneth John Way. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 17......... 3309 Statements of Irving Israel Galex; Harry Lipson; Seymour Janowsky; Harry M. Nachmais; Curtis Quinten Murphy; Martin Schmidt; and David Holtzman. Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, December 18......... 3349 Statements of Joseph John Oliveri; Philip Joseph Shapiro; Samuel Martin Segner; Joseph Linton Layne; and Harry William Levitties. Transfer of Occupation Currency Plates--Espionage Phase, October 19..................................................... 3403 Testimony of William H. Taylor; and Alvin W. Hall. Transfer of Occupation Currency Plates--Espionage Phase, October 21..................................................... 3425 Testimony of Elizabeth Bentley. Transfer of Occupation Currency Plates--Espionage Phase, November 10.................................................... 3431 Statement of Walter F. Frese. Subversion and Espionage in Defense Establishments and Industry, November 12.................................................... 3445 Testimony of Jean A. Arsenault; Sidney Friedlander; Theresa Mary Chiaro; Albert J. Bottisti; Anna Jegabbi; Emma Elizabeth Drake; Henry Daniel Hughes; Abden Francisco; Joseph Arthur Gebhardt; Emanuel Fernandez; Robert Pierson Northrup; Lawrence Leo Gebo; William J. Mastriani; Gordon Belgrave; Arthur Lee Owens; John Sardella; and Rudolph Rissland. Subversion and Espionage in Defense Establishments and Industry, November 13.................................................... 3545 Testimony of Lillian Krummel; Dewey Franklin Brashear; Arthur George; Higeno Hermida; Paul K. Hacko; Alex Henry Klein; Harold S. Rollins; and John Starling Brooks. Subversion and Espionage in Defense Establishments and Industry, November 18.................................................... 3585 Testimony of Karl T. Mabbskka; James John Walsh; Nathaniel Mills; Robert Goodwin; Henry Canning Archdeacon; Donald Herbert Morrill; Francis F. Peacock; William Richmond Wilder; Donald R. Finlayson; Theodore Pappas; George Homes; Alexander Gregory; Witoutos S. Bolys; Benjamin Alfred; and Witulad Piekarski. Transfer of the Ship ``Greater Buffalo'', December 8............. 3609 Testimony of Paul D. Page, Jr.; and George J. Kolowich. Personnel Practices in Government--Case of Telford Taylor, December 8..................................................... 3639 Testimony of Philip Young. PREFACE ---------- The power to investigate ranks among the U.S. Senate's highest responsibilities. As James Madison reasoned in The Federalist Papers: ``If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels governed men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.'' It is precisely for the purposes of government controlling itself that Congress investigates. A century after Madison, another thoughtful authority on Congress, Woodrow Wilson, judged the ``vigilant oversight of administration'' to be as important as legislation. Wilson argued that because self-governing people needed to be fully informed in order to cast their votes wisely, the information resulting from a Congressional investigation might be ``even more important than legislation.'' Congress, he said, was the ``eyes and the voice'' of the nation. In 1948, the Senate established the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations to continue the work of a special committee, first chaired by Missouri Senator Harry Truman, to investigate the national defense program during World War II. Over the next half century, the Subcommittee under our predecessor Chairmen, Senators John McClellan, Henry Jackson, Sam Nunn, William Roth, and John Glenn, conducted a broad array of hard-hitting investigations into allegations of corruption and malfeasance, leading repeatedly to the exposure of wrongdoing and to the reform of government programs. The phase of the Subcommittee's history from 1953 to 1954, when it was chaired by Joseph McCarthy, however, is remembered differently. Senator McCarthy's zeal to uncover subversion and espionage led to disturbing excesses. His browbeating tactics destroyed careers of people who were not involved in the infiltration of our government. His freewheeling style caused both the Senate and the Subcommittee to revise the rules governing future investigations, and prompted the courts to act to protect the Constitutional rights of witnesses at Congressional hearings. Senator McCarthy's excesses culminated in the televised Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954, following which the Senate voted overwhelmingly for his censure. Under Senate provisions regulating investigative records, the records of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations are deposited in the National Archives and sealed for fifty years, in part to protect the privacy of the many witnesses who testified in closed executive sessions. With the half century mark here relative to the executive session materials of the McCarthy subcommittee, we requested that the Senate Historical Office prepare the transcripts for publication, to make them equally accessible to students and the general public across the nation. They were edited by Dr. Donald A. Ritchie, with the assistance of Beth Bolling and Diane Boyle, and with the cooperation of the staff of the Center for Legislative Archives at the National Archives and Records Administration. These hearings are a part of our national past that we can neither afford to forget nor permit to reoccur. Carl Levin, Chairman. Susan M. Collins, Ranking Member. Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. INTRODUCTION ---------- The executive sessions of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations for the Eighty-third Congress, from 1953 to 1954, make sobering reading. Senator Joseph R. McCarthy assumed the chairmanship of the Government Operations Committee in January 1953 and exercised prerogative, under then existing rules, to chair the subcommittee as well. For the three previous years, Senator McCarthy had dominated the national news with his charges of subversion and espionage at the highest levels of the federal government, and the chairmanship provided him with a vehicle for attempting to prove and perhaps expand those allegations. Elected as a Wisconsin Republican in 1946, Senator McCarthy had burst into national headlines in February 1950, when he delivered a Lincoln Day address in Wheeling, West Virginia, that blamed failures in American foreign policy on Communist infiltration of the United States government. He held in his hand, the senator asserted, a list of known Communists still working in the Department of State. When a special subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee investigated these charges and rejected them as ``a fraud and a hoax,'' the issue might have died, but the outbreak of the Korean War, along with the conviction of Alger Hiss and arrest of Julius Rosenberg in 1950, lent new credibility to McCarthy's charges. He continued to make accusations that such prominent officials as General George C. Marshall had been part of an immense Communist conspiracy. In 1952, Dwight D. Eisenhower's election as president carried Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, and seniority elevated McCarthy to chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Jurisdictional lines of the Senate assigned loyalty issues to the Internal Security Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, but Senator McCarthy interpreted his subcommittee's mandate broadly enough to cover any government-related activity, including subversion and espionage. Under his chairmanship, the subcommittee shifted from searching out waste and corruption in the executive branch to focusing almost exclusively on Communist infiltration. The subcommittee vastly accelerated the pace of its hearings. By comparison to the six executive sessions held by his predecessor in 1952, McCarthy held 117 in 1953. The subcommittee also conducted numerous public hearings, which were often televised, but it did the largest share of its work behind closed doors. During McCarthy's first year as chairman, the subcommittee took testimony from 395 witnesses in executive sessions and staff interrogatories (by comparison to 214 witnesses in the public sessions), and compiled 8,969 pages of executive session testimony (compared to 5,671 pages of public hearings). Transcripts of public hearings were published within months, while those of executive sessions were sealed and deposited in the National Archives and Records Administration. Under the provisions of S. Res. 474, records involving Senate investigations may be sealed for fifty years. With the approach of the hearings' fiftieth anniversary, the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations authorized the Senate Historical Office to prepare the executive session transcripts for publication. Professional stenographers worked independently under contract to the Senate to produce the original transcripts of the closed hearings. The transcripts are as accurate as the stenographers were able to make them, but since neither senators nor witnesses reviewed their remarks, as they would have for published hearings, they could correct neither misspelled names nor misheard words. Several different stenographers operating in Washington, New York, and Massachusetts prepared the transcripts, accounting for occasional variations in style. The current editing has sought to reproduce the transcripts as closely to their original form as possible, deleting no content but correcting apparent errors--such as the stenographer's turning the town of Bethpage, New York, into a person's name, Beth Page. Transcribers also employed inconsistent capitalization and punctuation, which have been corrected in this printed version. The executive sessions have been given the same titles as the related public hearings, and all hearings on the same subject matter have been grouped together chronologically. If witnesses in executive session later testified in public, the spelling of their names that appeared in the printed hearing has been adopted. If thesubcommittee ordered that the executive session testimony be published, those portions have not been reprinted, but editorial notes indicate where the testimony occurred and provide a citation. No transcripts were made of ``off the record'' discussions, which are noted within the hearings. Senator McCarthy is identified consistently as ``The Chairman.'' Senators who occasionally chaired hearings in his absence, or chaired special subcommittees, are identified by name. Brief editorial notes appear at the top of each hearing to place the subject matter into historical context and to indicate whether the witnesses later testified in public session. Wherever possible, the witnesses' birth and death dates are noted. A few explanatory footnotes have been added, although editorial intrusion has been kept to a minimum. The subcommittee deposited all of the original transcripts at the Center for Legislative Archives at the National Archives and Records Administration, where they are now open for research. THE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS Following the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, the Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program (popularly known as the Truman committee, for its chairman, Harry S. Truman) merged with the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments to become the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. In 1953 the Committee on Executive Expenditures was renamed the Committee on Government Operations, and Senator Joseph R. McCarthy (1908-1957), who had joined the committee in 1947, became chairman of both the committee and its permanent subcommittee. Republicans won a narrow majority during the Eighty-third Congress, and held only a one-seat advantage over Democrats in the committee ratios. The influx of new senators since World War II also meant that except for the subcommittee's chairman and ranking member, all other members were serving in their first terms. Senator McCarthy had just been elected to his second term in 1952, while the ranking Democrat, Arkansas Senator John L. McClellan (1896-1977), had first been elected in 1942, and had chaired the Government Operations Committee during the Eighty-first and Eighty-second Congresses. The other members of the subcommittee included Republicans Karl Mundt (1900-1974), Everett McKinley Dirksen (1896-1969), and Charles E. Potter (1916-1979), and Democrats Henry M. Jackson (1912-1983) and Stuart Symington (1901-1988) \1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See Committee on Government Operations, 50th Anniversary History, 1921-1971, 92nd Cong., 1st sess., S. Doc. 31 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1971). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- With senators serving multiple committee assignments, only on rare occasions would the entire membership of any committee or subcommittee attend a hearing. Normally, Senate committees operated with a few senators present, with members coming and going through a hearing depending on their conflicting commitments. Unique circumstances developed in 1953 to allow Senator McCarthy to be the sole senator present at many of the subcommittee's hearings, particularly those held away from Washington. In July 1953, a dispute over the chairman's ability to hire staff without consultation caused the three Democrats on the subcommittee to resign. They did not return until January 1954. McCarthy and his staff also called hearings on short notice, and often outside of Washington, which prevented the other Republican senators from attending. Senators Everett Dirksen and Charles Potter occasionally sent staff members to represent them (and at times to interrogate witnesses). By operating so often as a ``one-man committee,'' Senator McCarthy gave witnesses the impression, as Harvard law school dean Erwin Griswold observed, that they were facing a ``judge, jury, prosecutor, castigator, and press agent, all in one.'' \2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Erwin N. Griswold, The 5th Amendment Today (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955), 67. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 had created a non-partisan professional staff for eachSenate committee. Originally, staff worked for the committee as a whole and were not divided by majority and minority. Chairman McCarthy inherited a small staff from his predecessor, Clyde Hoey, a Democrat from North Carolina, but a significant boost in appropriations enabled him to add many of his own appointees. For chief counsel, McCarthy considered candidates that included Robert Morris, counsel of the Internal Security Subcommittee, Robert F. Kennedy, and John J. Sirica, but he offered the job to Roy M. Cohn (1927-1986). The son of a New York State appellate division judge, Cohn had been too young to take the bar exam when he graduated from Columbia University Law School. A year later he became assistant United States attorney on the day he was admitted to the bar. In the U.S. attorney's office he took part in the prosecution of William Remington, a former Commerce Department employee convicted of perjury relating to his Communist party membership. Cohn also participated in the prosecution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, and in the trial of the top Communist party leaders in the United States. He earned a reputation as a relentless questioner with a sharp mind and retentive memory. In 1952, Cohn briefly served as special assistant to Truman's attorney general, James McGranery, and prepared an indictment for perjury against Owen Lattimore, the Johns Hopkins University professor whom Senator McCarthy had accused of being a top Soviet agent. Cohn's appointment also helped counteract the charges of prejudice leveled against the anti-Communist investigations. (Indeed, when he was informed that the B'nai B'rith was providing lawyers to assist the predominantly Jewish engineers suspended from Fort Monmouth, on the assumption of anti-Semitism, Cohn responded: ``Well, that is an outrageous assumption. I am a member and an officer of B'nai B'rith.'') In December 1952, McCarthy invited Cohn to become subcommittee counsel. ``You know, I'm going to be the chairman of the investigating committee in the Senate. They're all trying to push me off the Communist issue . . . ,'' Cohn recalled the senator telling him. ``The sensible thing for me to do, they say, is start investigating the agriculture program or find out how many books they've got bound upside down at the Library of Congress. They want me to play it safe. I fought this Red issue. I won the primary on it. I won the election on it, and don't see anyone else around who intends to take it on. You can be sure that as chairman of this committee this is going to be my work. And I want you to help me.'' \3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ Washington Star, July 20, 1954; Roy Cohn, McCarthy (New York: New American Library, 1968), 46. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- At twenty-six, Roy Cohn lacked any previous legislative experience and tended to run hearings more like a prosecutor before a grand jury, collecting evidence to make his case in open session rather than to offer witnesses a full and fair hearing. Republican Senator Karl Mundt, a veteran investigator who had previously served on the House Un-American Activities Committee, urged Cohn to call administrative officials who could explain the policies and rationale of the government agencies under investigation, and to keep the hearings balanced, but Cohn felt disinclined to conduct an open forum. Arrogant and brash, he alienated others on the staff, until even Senator McCarthy admitted that putting ``a young man in charge of other young men doesn't work out too well.'' Cohn's youth further distanced him from most of the witnesses he interrogated. Having reached maturity during the Cold War rather than the Depression, he could not fathom a legitimate reason for anyone having attended a meeting, signed a petition, or contributed to an organization with any Communist affiliation. In his memoirs, Cohn later recounted how a retired university professor once told him ``that had I been born twelve or fifteen years earlier my world-view and therefore my character would have been very different.'' \4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Ibid., 22; David F. Krugler, The Voice of America and the Domestic Propaganda Battles, 1945-1953 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2000), 191. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- An indifferent administrator, Senator McCarthy gave his counsel free rein to conduct investigations. In fact, he appointed Cohn without having first removed the subcommittee's previous chief counsel, Francis``Frip'' Flanagan. To remedy this discrepancy, McCarthy changed Flanagan's title to general counsel, although he never delineated any differences in authority. When a reporter asked what these titles meant, McCarthy confessed that he did not know. The subcommittee's chief clerk, Ruth Young Watt, found that whenever a decision needed to be made, Cohn would say, ``Ask Frip,'' and Flanagan would reply, ``Ask Roy.'' ``In other words,'' she explained, ``I'd just end up doing what I thought was right.'' \5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ Ruth Young Watt oral history, 109, Senate Historical Office. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The subcommittee held most of its hearings in room 357 of the Senate Office Building (now named the Russell Senate Office Building). Whenever it anticipated larger crowds for public hearings, it would shift to room 318, the spacious Caucus Room (now room 325), which better accommodated radio and television coverage. In 1953 the subcommittee also held extensive hearings in New York City, working out of the federal courthouse at Foley Square and the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, while other executive sessions took place at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey, and in Boston. Roy Cohn had recruited his close friend, G. David Schine (1927-1996), as the subcommittee's unpaid ``chief consultant.'' The two men declined to work out of the subcommittee's crowded office--Cohn did not even have a desk there. (``I don't have an office as such,'' Cohn later testified. ``We have room 101 with 1 desk and 1 chair. That is used jointly by Mr. Carr and myself. The person who gets there first occupies the chair.'' \6\) Instead, Cohn and Schine rented more spacious quarters for themselves in a nearby private office building. When the subcommittee met in New York, Schine made his family's limousine and suite at the Waldorf- Astoria available for its use. As the subcommittee's only unpaid staff member, he was not reimbursed for travel and other expenses, including his much-publicized April 1953 tour with Cohn of U.S. information libraries in Europe. In executive sessions, Schine occasionally questioned witnesses and even presided in Senator McCarthy's absence, with the chief counsel addressing him as ``Mr. Chairman.'' Others on the staff, including James Juliana and Daniel G. Buckley, similarly conducted hearing-like interrogatories of witnesses. Schine continued his associations with the subcommittee even after his induction into the army that November--an event that triggered the chairman's epic confrontation with the army the following year.\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Special Subcommittee on Investigations, Special Senate Investigation on Charges and Countercharges Involving: Secretary of the Army Robert T. Stevens, John G. Adams, H. Struve Hensel and Senator Joe McCarthy, Roy M. Cohn, and Francis P. Carr, 83rd Cong., 2nd sess., part 47 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1954), 1803. \7\ Ruth Young Watt oral history, 107-108; 130; Washington Star, January 1, 1953. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The hectic pace and controversial nature of the subcommittee hearings during the Eighty-third Congress placed great burdens on the staff and contributed to frequent departures. Of the twelve staff members that McCarthy inherited, only four remained by the end of the year--an investigator and three clerks. Of the twenty-one new staff added during 1953, six did not last the year. Research director Howard Rushmore (1914-1958) resigned after four months, and assistant counsel Robert Kennedy (1925-1968), after literally coming to blows with Roy Cohn, resigned in August, telling the chairman that the subcommittee was ``headed for disaster.'' (The following year, Kennedy returned as minority counsel.) When Francis Flanagan left in June 1953, Senator McCarthy named J. B. Matthews (1894-1966) as executive director, hoping that the seasoned investigator would impose some order on the staff. Matthews boasted of having joined more Communist-front organizations than any other American, although he had never joined the Communist party. When he fell out of favor with radical groups in the mid-1930s, he converted into an outspoken anti-Communist and served as chief investigator for the House Un-American Activities Committee from 1939 to 1945. An ordained Methodist minister, he was referred to as ``Doctor Matthews,'' although he held no doctoral degree. Just as McCarthy announced his appointment to head the subcommittee staff in June 1953,Matthews's article on ``Reds in Our Churches'' appeared in the American Mercury magazine. His portrayal of Communist sympathy among the nation's Protestant clergy caused a public uproar, and Republican Senator Charles Potter joined the three Democrats on the subcommittee in calling for Matthews's dismissal. Although Matthews resigned voluntarily, it was Senator McCarthy's insistence on maintaining the sole power to hire and fire staff that caused the three Democratic senators to resign from the subcommittee, while retaining their membership in the full Government Operations Committee. Senator McCarthy then appointed Francis P. Carr, Jr. (1925-1994) as executive director, with Roy Cohn continuing as chief counsel to direct the investigation.\8\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ G. F. Goodwin, ``Joseph Brown Matthews,'' Dictionary of American Biography, Supplement 8 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1988), 424-27; Lawrence B. Glickman, ``The Strike in the Temple of Consumption: Consumer Activitism and Twentieth-Century American Political Culture,'' Journal of American History, 88 (June 2001), 99- 128; Robert F. Kennedy, The Enemy Within (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1960), 176. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE RIGHTS OF WITNESSES In their hunt for subversion and espionage, Senator McCarthy and chief counsel Cohn conducted hearings on the State Department, the Voice of America, the U.S. overseas libraries, the Government Printing Office, and the Army Signal Corps. Believing any method justifiable in combating an international conspiracy, they grilled witnesses intensely. Senator McCarthy showed little patience for due process and defined witnesses' constitutional rights narrowly. His hectoring style inspired the term ``McCarthyism,'' which came to mean ``any investigation that flouts the rights of individuals,'' usually involving character assassination, smears, mudslinging, sensationalism, and guilt by association. ``McCarthyism''-- coined by the Washington Post cartoonist Herblock, in 1950-- grew so universally accepted that even Senator McCarthy employed it, redefining it as ``the fight for America.'' Subsequently, the term has been applied collectively to all congressional investigations of suspected Communists, including those by the House Un-American Activities Committee and Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, which bore no direct relation to the permanent subcommittee.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \9\ William Safire, Safire's New Political Dictionary: The Definitive Guide to the New Language of Politics (New York: Random House, 1993), 441; Senator Joe McCarthy, McCarthyism: The Fight for America (New York: Devin-Adair, 1952). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In these closed executive sessions, Senator McCarthy's treatment of witnesses ranged from abrasive to solicitous. The term ``executive sessions'' derives from the Senate's division of its business between legislative (bills and resolutions) and executive (treaties and nominations). Until 1929 the Senate debated all executive business in closed session, clearing the public and press galleries, and locking the doors. ``Executive'' thereby became synonymous with ``closed.'' Committees held closed sessions to conduct preliminary inquiries, to mark up bills before reporting them to the floor, and to handle routine committee housekeeping. By hearing witnesses privately, the permanent subcommittee could avoid incidents of misidentification and could determine how forthcoming witnesses were likely to be in public. In the case of McCarthy, however, ``executive session'' took a different meaning. John G. Adams, who attended many of these hearings as the army's counsel from 1953 to 1954, observed that the chairman used the term ``executive session'' rather loosely. ``It didn't really mean a closed session, since McCarthy allowed in various friends, hangers-on, and favored newspaper reporters,'' wrote Adams. ``Nor did it mean secret, because afterwards McCarthy would tell the reporters waiting outside whatever he pleased. Basically, `executive' meant that Joe could do anything he wanted.'' Adams recalled that the subcommittee's Fort Monmouth hearings were held in a ``windowless storage room in the bowels of the courthouse, unventilated and oppressively hot,'' into which crowded thesenator, his staff, witnesses, and observers who at various times included trusted newspaper reporters, the governor of Wisconsin, the chairman's wife, mother-in-law and friends. ``The `secret' hearings were, after all, quite a show,'' Adams commented, adding that the transcripts were rarely released to the public. This ostensibly protected the privacy of those interrogated, but also gave the chairman an opportunity to give to the press his version of what had transpired behind closed doors, with little chance of rebuttal.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ John G. Adams, Without Precedent: The Story of the Death of McCarthyism (New York: W. W. Norton, 1983), 53, 60, 66. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Roy Cohn insisted that the subcommittee gave ``suspects'' rights that they would not get in a court of law. Unlike a witness before a grand jury, or testifying on the stand, those facing the subcommittee could have their attorney sit beside them for consultation. The executive sessions further protected the witnesses, Cohn pointed out, by excluding the press and the public. But Gen. Telford Taylor, an American prosecutor at Nuremberg, charged McCarthy with conducting ``a new and indefensible kind of hearing, which is neither a public hearing nor an executive session.'' In Taylor's view, the closed sessions were a device that enabled the chairman to tell newspapers whatever he saw fit about what happened, without giving witnesses a chance to defend themselves or reporters a chance to check the accuracy of the accusations. Characteristically, Senator McCarthy responded to this criticism with an executive session inquiry into Gen. Taylor's loyalty. The chairman used other hearings to settle personal scores with men such as Edward Barrett, State Department press spokesman under Dean Acheson, and Edward Morgan, staff director of the Tydings subcommittee that had investigated his Wheeling speech.\11\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ Cohn, McCarthy, 51; C. Dickerman Williams, ``The Duty to Investigate,'' The Freeman, 3 (September 21, 1953), 919; New York Times, November 28, 1953. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Inclusion as a witness in these volumes in no way suggests a measure of guilt. Some of the witnesses who came before the permanent subcommittee in 1953 had been Communists; others had not. Some witnesses cooperated by providing names and other information; others did not. Some testified on subjects entirely unrelated to communism, subversion or espionage. The names of many of these witnesses appeared in contemporary newspaper accounts, even when they did not testify in public. About a third of the witnesses called in executive session did not appear at any public hearing, and Senator McCarthy often defined such witnesses as having been ``cleared.'' Some were called as witnesses out of mistaken identity. Others defended themselves so resolutely or had so little evidence against them that the chairman and counsel chose not to pursue them. For those witnesses who did appear in public, the closed hearings served as dress rehearsals. The subcommittee also heard many witnesses in public session who had not previously appeared at a closed hearing, usually committee staff or government officials for whom a preliminary hearing was not deemed necessary. Given the rapid pace of the hearings, the subcommittee staff had little time for preparation. ``No real research was ever done,'' Robert Kennedy complained. ``Most of the investigations were instituted on the basis of some preconceived notion by the chief counsel or his staff members and not on the basis of any information that had been developed.'' \12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ Kennedy, The Enemy Within, 307. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- After July 1953, when the Democratic senators resigned from the subcommittee, other Republican senators also stopped attending the subcommittee's closed hearings, in part because so many of the hearings were held away from the District of Columbia and called on short notice. Witnesses also received subpoenas on such short notice that they found it hard to prepare themselves or consult with counsel. Theoretically the committee, rather than the chairman, issued subpoenas, Army Counsel John G. Adams noted. ``But McCarthy ignored the Senate rule that required a vote of the other members every time he wanted to haul someone in.He signed scores of blank subpoenas which his staff members carried in their inside pockets, and issued as regularly as traffic tickets.'' Witnesses repeatedly complained that subpoenas to appear were served on them just before the hearings, either the night before or the morning of, making it hard for them to obtain legal representation. Even if they obtained a lawyer, the senator would not permit attorneys to raise objections or to talk for the witness. Normally, a quorum of at least one-third of the committee or subcommittee members was needed to take sworn testimony, although a single senator could hold hearings if authorized by the committee. The rules did not bar ``one-man hearings,'' because senators often came and went during a committee hearing and committee business could come to a halt if a minimum number of senators were required to hold a hearing.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ Adams, Without Precedent, 67, 69. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- When the chairman acted as a one-man committee, the tone of the hearings more closely resembled an inquisition. Witnesses who swore that they had never joined the Communist party or engaged in espionage or sabotage were held accountable for long-forgotten petitions they had signed a decade earlier or for having joined organizations that the attorney general later cited as Communist fronts. Seeking any sign of political unorthodoxy, the chairman and the subcommittee staff scrutinized the witnesses' lives and grilled them about the political beliefs of colleagues, neighbors and family members. In the case of Stanley Berinsky, he was suspended from the Army Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth after security officers discovered that his mother had once been a member of the Communist party: The Chairman. Let's get this straight. I know it is unusual to appear before a committee. So many witnesses get nervous. You just got through telling us you did not know she was a Communist; now you tell us she resigned from the Communist party? As of when? Mr. Berinsky. I didn't know this until the security suspension came up at Fort Monmouth. The Chairman. When was that? Mr. Berinsky. That was in 1952. The Chairman.  Mr. Berinsky. I told her what happened. At that time she told me she had been out for several years. The Chairman. . . . Well, did you ever ask her if she was a Communist? Mr. Berinsky. No, sir. . . . The Chairman. When you went to see her, weren't you curious? If somebody told me my mother was a Communist, I'd get on the phone and say, ``Mother is this true''? . . . Did she tell you why she resigned? Mr. Berinsky. If seems to me she probably did it because I held a government job and she didn't want to jeopardize my position. The Chairman. In other words, it wasn't because she felt differently about the Communist party, but because she didn't want to jeopardize your position? Mr. Berinsky. Probably. The Chairman. Was she still a Communist at heart in 1952? Mr. Berinsky. Well, I don't know how you define that. The Chairman. Do you think she was a Communist, using your own definition of communism? Mr. Berinsky. I guess my own definition is one who is a member of the party. No. The Chairman. Let's say one who was a member and dropped out and is still loyal to the party. Taking that as a definition, would you say she is still a Communist? Mr. Berinsky. Do you mean in an active sense? The Chairman. Loyal in her mind. Mr. Berinsky. That is hard to say. The Chairman. Is she still living? Mr. Berinsky. Yes.\14\ \14\ Executive session transcript, November 5, 1953. Perhaps the most recurring phrase in these executive session hearings was not the familiar ``Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party?'' That was the mantra of the public hearings. Instead, in the closed hearings it was ``In other words,'' which prefaced the chairman's relentless rephrasing of witnesses' testimony into something with more sinister implications than they intended. Given Senator McCarthy's tendency toward hyperbole, witnesses objected to his use of inappropriate or inflammatory words to characterize their testimony. He took their objections as a --------------------------------------------------------------------------- sign they were covering up something: The Chairman. Did you live with him when the apartment was raided by army security? Mr. Okun. Senator, the apartment was not raided. He had been called and asked whether he would let them search it. . . The Chairman. You seem to shy off at the word ``raided.'' When the army security men go over and make a complete search of the apartment and find forty-three classified documents, to me that means ``raided.'' You seem, both today and the other day to be going out of your way trying to cover up for this man Coleman. Mr. Okun. No, sir. I do not want to cover up anything.\15\ \15\ Executive session transcript, October 23, 1953. A few of those who appeared before the subcommittee later commented that the chairman was less intimidating in private than his public behavior had led them to expect. ``Many of us have formed an impression of McCarthy from the now familiar Herblock caricatures. He is by no means grotesque,'' recalled Martin Merson, who clashed with the senator over the Voice of America. ``McCarthy, the relaxed dinner guest, is a charming man with the friendliest of smiles.'' McCarthy's sometimes benign treatment of witnesses in executive session may have been a tactic intended to lull them into false complacency before his more relentless questioning in front of the television cameras, which certainly seemed to bring out the worst in him. Ruth Young Watt (1910-1996), the subcommittee's chief clerk from 1948 until her retirement in 1979, regarded the chairman as ``a very kind man, very thoughtful of people working with him,'' but a person who would ``get off on a tirade sometimes'' in public hearings.\16\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ Martin Merson, The Private Diary of a Public Servant (New York: Macmillan, 1955), 83; Ruth Watt oral history, 140. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Senator McCarthy regularly informed witnesses of their right to decline to answer if they felt an answer might incriminate them, but he interpreted their refusal to answer a question as an admission of guilt. He also encouraged government agencies and private corporations to fire anyone who took the Fifth Amendment before a congressional committee. When witnesses also attempted to cite their First Amendment rights, the chairman warned that they would be cited for contempt of Congress. Although the chairman pointed out that membership in the Communist party was not a crime, many witnesses declined to admit their past connections to the party to avoid having to name others with whom they were associated. Some witnesses wanted to argue that the subcommittee had no right to question their political beliefs, but their attorneys advised them that it would be more prudent to decline to answer. During 1953, some seventy witnesses before the subcommittee invoked the Fifth Amendment and declined to answer questions concerning Communist activities. Five refused to answer on the basis of the First Amendment, two claimed marital privileges, and Harvard Professor Wendell Furry invoked no constitutional grounds for his failure toanswer questions.\17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ Annual Report of the Committee on Government Operations Made by its Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, 83rd Cong., 2nd sess., S. Rept. 881 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1954), 10-14; see also Griswold, The 5th Amendment Today, and Victor S. Navasky, Naming Names (New York: Viking Press, 1980). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some witnesses invoked the Fifth Amendment to avoid implicating those they knew to be Communists. Other invoked the Fifth Amendment as a blanket response to any questions about the Communist party, after being warned by their attorneys that if they answered questions about themselves they could be compelled to name their associates. In the case of Rogers v. U.S. (1951) the Supreme Court had ruled that a witness could not refuse to answer questions simply out of a ``desire to protect others from punishment, much less to protect another from interrogation by a grand jury.'' The Justice Department applied the same reasoning to witnesses who refused to identify others to a congressional committee. Since the questions were relevant to the operation of the government, the department assured Senator McCarthy that it was his right as a congressional investigator to order witnesses to answer questions about whether they know any Communists who might be working in the government or in defense plants.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ Assistant Attorney General Warren Olney, III to Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, July 7, 1954, full text in the executive session transcript for July 15, 1954. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Senator McCarthy explained to witnesses that they could take the Fifth Amendment only if they were concerned that telling the truth would incriminate them, a reasoning that redefined the right against self-incrimination as incriminating in itself. Calling them ``Fifth-Amendment Communists,'' he insisted that ``an innocent man does not need the Fifth Amendment.'' At a public hearing, the chairman pressed one witness: ``Are you declining, among other reasons, for the reason that you are relying upon that section of the Fifth Amendment which provides that no person may be a witness against himself if he feels that his testimony might tend to incriminate him? If you are relying upon that, you can tell me. If not, of course, you are ordered to answer. A Communist and espionage agent has the right to refuse on that ground, but not on any of the other grounds you cited.'' \19\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Army Signal Corps-- Subversion and Espionage, 83rd Cong., 1st sess. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1954), 153, 299-300. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal court rulings had given congressional investigators considerable leeway to operate. In the aftermath of the Teapot Dome investigation, the Supreme Court ruled in McGrain v. Daugherty (1927) that a committee could subpoena anyone to testify, including private citizens who were neither government officials nor employees. In Sinclair v. U.S. (1929), the Supreme Court recognized the right of Congress to investigate anything remotely related to its legislative and oversight functions. The court also upheld the Smith Act of 1940, which made it illegal to advocate overthrowing the U.S. government by force or violence. In 1948 the Justice Department prosecuted twelve Communist leaders for having conspired to organize ``as a society, group and assembly of persons who teach and advocate the overthrow and destruction of the Government of the United States by force and violence.'' Upholding their convictions, in Dennis v. U.S. (1951), the Supreme Court denied that their prosecution had violated the First Amendment, on the grounds that the government's power to prevent an armed rebellion subordinated free speech. During the next six years 126 individuals were indicted solely for being members of the Communist party. The Mundt-Nixon Act of 1950 further barred Communist party members from employment in defense installations, denied them passports, and required them to register with the Subversive Activities Control Board. In Rogers v. U.S. (1951) the Supreme Court declared that a witness who had testified that she was treasurer of a localCommunist party and had possession of its records could not claim the Fifth Amendment when asked to whom she gave those records. Her initial admission had waived her right to invoke her privilege and she was guilty of contempt for failing to answer. Not until after Senator McCarthy's investigations had ceased did the Supreme Court change direction on the rights of congressional witnesses, in three sweeping decisions handed down on June 17, 1957. In Yates v. U.S. the court overturned the convictions of fourteen Communist party members under the Smith Act, finding that organizing a Communist party was not synonymous with advocating the overthrow of the government by force and violence. As a result, the Justice Department stopped seeking further indictments under the Smith Act. In Watkins v. U.S., the court specified that an investigating committee must demonstrate a legislative purpose to justify probing into private affairs, and ruled that public education was an insufficient reason to force witnesses to answer questions under the penalty of being held in contempt. These rulings confirmed that the Bill of Rights applied to anyone subpoenaed by a congressional committee.\20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ Arthur J. Sabin, In Calmer Times: The Supreme Court and Red Monday (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 11, 39, 55-57, 154-55, 167-68. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If witnesses refused to cooperate, the chairman threatened them with indictment and incarceration. At the end of his first year as chairman, he advised one witness: ``During the course of these hearings, I think up to this time we have some--this is just a rough guess--twenty cases we submitted to the grand jury, either for perjury or for contempt before this committee. Do not just assume that your name was pulled out of a hat. Before you were brought here, we make a fairly thorough and complete investigation. So I would like to strongly advise you to either tell the truth or, if you think the truth will incriminate you, then you are entitled to refuse to answer. I cannot urge that upon you too strongly. I have given that advice to other people here before the committee. They thought they were smarter than our investigators. They will end up in jail. This is not a threat; this is just friendly advice I am giving you. Do you understand that?'' In the end, however, no witness who appeared before the subcommittee during his chairmanship was imprisoned for perjury, contempt, espionage, or subversion. Several witnesses were tried for contempt, and some were convicted, but each case was overturned on appeal.\21\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ Executive session transcript, December 15, 1953. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- AREA OF INVESTIGATION Following the tradition of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, the first executive session hearings in 1953 dealt with influence peddling, an outgrowth of an investigation begun in the previous Congress. Senator McCarthy absented himself from most of the influence-peddling hearings and left Senator Karl Mundt or Senator John McClellan, the ranking Republican and Democrat on the Government Operations Committee, to preside in his place. But the chairman made subversion and espionage his sole mission. On the day that the subcommittee launched a new set of hearings on influence peddling, it began hearings on the State Department's filing system, whose byzantine complexity Senator McCarthy attributed to either Communist infiltration of gross incompetence. With the State Department investigation, Senator McCarthy returned to familiar territory. His Wheeling speech in 1950 had accused the department of harboring known Communists. The senator demanded that the State Department open its ``loyalty files,'' and then complained that it provided only ``skinny- ribbed bones of the files,'' ``skeleton files,'' ``purged files,'' and ``phony files.'' The chairman's interest was naturally piqued in 1953 when State Department security officer John E. Matson reported irregularitiesin the department's filing system, and charged that personnel files had been ``looted'' of derogatory information in order to protect disloyal individuals. Although State Department testimony suggested that its system had been designed to protect the rights of employees in matters of career evaluation and promotion, Senator McCarthy contended that there had been a conspiracy to manipulate the files.\22\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ Robert Griffith, The Politics of Fear: Joseph R. McCarthy and the Senate (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1970), 90-93; ``The Raided Files,'' Newsweek (February 16, 1953), 28-29. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A brief investigation of homosexuals as security risks also grew out of previous inquiries. In 1950, Senator McCarthy denounced ``those Communists and queers who have sold 400 million Asiatic people into atheistic slavery and have American people in a hypnotic trance, headed blindly toward the same precipice.'' He often laced his speeches with references to ``powder puff diplomacy,'' and accused his opponents of ``softness'' toward communism. ``Why is it that wherever it is in the world that our State Department touches the red-hot aggression of Soviet communism there is heard a sharp cry of pain--a whimper of confusion and fear? . . . Why must we be forced to cringe in the face of communism?'' By contrast, he portrayed himself in masculine terms: in rooting out communism he ``had to do a bare-knuckle job or suffer the same defeat that a vast number of well-meaning men have suffered over past years. It has been a bare-knuckle job. As long as I remain in the Senate it will continue as a bare-knuckle job.'' The subcommittee had earlier responded to Senator McCarthy's complaint that the State Department had reinstated homosexuals suspended for moral turpitude with an investigation in 1950 that produced a report on the Employment of Homosexuals and Other Sex Perverts in Government. The report had concluded that homosexuals' vulnerability to blackmail made them security risks and therefore ``not suitable for Government positions.'' \23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ New York Times, April 21, 1950; Congressional Record, 81st Cong., 2nd sess., A7249, A3426-28; Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments, Subcommittee on Investigations, Employment of Homosexuals and Other Sex Perverts in Government, 81st Cong., 2nd sess (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1950), 4-5, 19. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The closed hearings shifted to two subsidiaries of the State Department, the Voice of America and the U.S. information libraries, which had come under the department's jurisdiction following World War II. Dubious about mixing foreign policy and propaganda, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles viewed the Voice of America as an unwanted appendage and was not unsympathetic to some housecleaning. It was not long, however, before the Eisenhower administration began to worry that McCarthy's effort to clean out the ``left-wing debris'' was disrupting its own efforts to reorganize the government. Senator McCarthy also looked into allegations of Communist literature on the shelves of the U.S. Information Agency libraries abroad. Rather than call the officials who administered the libraries, the subcommittee subpoenaed the authors of the books in question, along with scholars and artists who traveled abroad on Fulbright scholarships. These witnesses became innocent bystanders in the cross-fire between the subcommittee and the administration as the senator expanded his inquiry from examinations of files and books to issues of espionage and sabotage, warning audiences: ``This is the era of the Armageddon--that final all-out battle between light and darkness foretold in the Bible.'' Zealousness in the search for subversives made the senator unwilling to accept bureaucratic explanations on such matters as personnel files and loyalty board procedures in the State Department, the Government Printing Office, and the U.S. Army.\24\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ ``Battle Unjoined,'' Newsweek (March 23, 1953), 28; Newsweek (April 27, 1953), 34; Address to the Sons of the American Revolution, May 15, 1950, Congressional Record, 81st Cong., 2nd sess., A3787. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Many of McCarthy's investigations began with a flurry of publicity and then faded away. Richard Rovere, who covered the subcommittee's hearings for the New Yorker, observed that investigation of the Voice of America was never completed. ``It just stopped--its largest possibilities for tumult had beenexhausted, and it trailed off into nothingness.'' \25\ Before completing one investigation, the subcommittee would have launched another. The hectic pace of hearings and the large number of witnesses it called strained the subcommittee's staff resources. Counsels coped by essentially asking the same questions of all witnesses. ``For the most part you wouldn't have time to do all your homework on that, we didn't have a big staff,'' commented chief clerk Ruth Watt. As a result, the subcommittee occasionally subpoenaed the wrong individuals, and used the closed hearings to winnow out cases of mistaken identity. Some of those who were subpoenaed failed to appear. As Roy Cohn complained of the authors whose books had appeared in overseas libraries, ``we subpoena maybe fifty and five show up.'' \26\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ Richard Rovere, Senator Joe McCarthy, (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1959), 159. \26\ Ruth Young Watt oral history, 128. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- When Senator McCarthy was preoccupied or uninterested in the subject matter, other senators would occasionally chair the hearings. Senator Charles Potter, for example, chaired a series of hearings on Korean War atrocities whose style, demeanor, and treatment of witnesses contrasted sharply with those that Senator McCarthy conducted; they are included in these volumes as a point of reference. Other hearings that stood apart in tone and substance concerned the illegal trade with the People's Republic of China, an investigation staffed by assistant counsel Robert F. Kennedy.\27\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ Gerald J. Bryan, ``Joseph McCarthy, Robert Kennedy, and the Greek Shipping Crisis: A Study of Foreign Policy Rhetoric,'' Presidential Studies Quarterly, 24 (Winter 1994), 93-104. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The subcommittee's investigations exposed examples of lax security in government agencies and defense contractors, but they failed to substantiate the chairman's accusations of subversion and espionage. Critics accused Senator McCarthy of gross exaggerations, of conducting ``show trials'' rather than fact-finding inquiries, of being careless and indifferent about evidence, of treating witnesses cavalierly and of employing irresponsible tactics. Indeed, the chairman showed no qualms about using raw investigative files as evidence. His willingness to break the established rules encouraged some security officers and federal investigators to leak investigative files to the subcommittee that they were constrained by agency policy from revealing. Rather than lead to the high-level officials he had expected to find, the leaked security files shifted his attention to lower-level civil servants. Since these civil servants lacked the freedom to fight back in the political arena, they became ``easier targets to bully.'' \28\ Even Roy Cohn conceded that McCarthy invited much of the criticism ``with his penchant for the dramatic,'' and ``by making statements that could be construed as promising too much.'' \29\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ Earl Latham, The Communist Controversy in Washington, From the New Deal to McCarthy (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966), 323, 349-54; John Earl Haynes, Red Scare or Red Menance? American Communism and Anticommunism in the Cold War Era (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1996), 147, 154. \29\ Cohn, McCarthy, 94-95. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Having predicted to the press that his inquiry into conditions at Fort Monmouth would uncover espionage, Senator McCarthy willingly accepted circumstantial evidence as grounds for the dismissal of an employee from government-related service. The subcommittee's dragnet included a number of perplexed witnesses who had signed a nominating petition years earliers, belonged to a union whose leadership included alleged Communists, bought an insurance policy through an organization later designated a Communist front organization, belonged to a Great Books club that read Karl Marx among other authors, had once dated a Communist, had relatives who were Communists, or simply had the same name as a Communist. Thosewitnesses against whom strong evidence of Communist activities existed tended to be involved in labor organizing--hardly news since the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) had already expelled such unions as the Federation of Architects, Engineers, Chemists and Technicians and the United Electrical Workers, whom McCarthy investigated. Those witnesses who named names of Communists with whom they had associated invariably described union activities, and none corroborated any claims of subversion and espionage. Critics questioned Senator McCarthy's sincerity as a Communist hunter, citing his penchant for privately embracing those whom he publicly attacked; others considered him a classic conspiracy theorist. Once he became convinced of the existence of a conspiracy, nothing could dissuade him. He exhibited impatience with those who saw things differently, interpreted mistakes as deliberate actions, and suspected his opponents of being part of the larger conspiracy. He would not entertain alternative explanations and stood contemptuous of doubters. A lack of evidence rarely deterred him or undermined his convictions. If witnesses disagreed on the facts, someone had to be lying. The Fort Monmouth investigation, for instance, had been spurred by reports of information from the Army Signal Corps laboratories turning up in Eastern Europe. Since Julius Rosenberg had worked at Fort Monmouth, McCarthy and Cohn were convinced that other Communist sympathizers were still supplying secrets to the enemy. But the Soviet Union had been an ally during the Second World War, and during that time had openly designated representatives at the laboratories, making espionage there superfluous. Nevertheless, McCarthy's pursuit of a spy ring caused officials at Fort Monmouth to suspend forty-two civilian employees. After the investigations, all but two were reinstated in their former jobs. Not until January 1954, did the remaining subcommittee members adopt rules changes that Democrats had demanded, and Senators McClellan, Jackson and Symington resumed their membership on the subcommittee. These rules changes removed the chairman's exclusive authority over staffing, and gave the minority members the right to hire their own counsel. Whenever the minority was unanimously opposed to holding a public hearing, the issue would go to the full committee to determine by majority vote. Also in 1954, the Republican Policy Committee proposed rules changes that would require a quorum to be present to hold hearings, and would prohibit holding hearings outside of the District of Columbia or taking confidential testimony unless authorized by a majority of committee members. In 1955 the Permanent Subcommittee adopted rules similar to those the Policy Committee recommended.\30\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ New York Times, July 11, 19, 1953, January 24, 26, 27, 1954; Congressional Record, 83rd Cong., 2nd sess, 2970. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Following the Army-McCarthy hearings of 1954, the Senate censured Senator McCarthy in December 1954 for conduct unbecoming of a senator. Court rulings in subsequent years had a significant impact on later congressional investigations by strengthening the rights of witnesses. Later in the 1950s, members and staff of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations joined with the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committee to form a special committee to investigate labor racketeering, with Robert F. Kennedy as chief counsel. Conducted in a more bipartisan manner and respectful of the rights of witnesses, their successes helped to reverse the negative image of congressional investigations fostered by Senator McCarthy's freewheeling investigatory style. Donald A. Ritchie, Senate Historical Office. SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF IN JANUARY 1953 Francis D. Flanagan, chief counsel (July 1, 1945 to June 30, 1953) Gladys E. Montier, assistant clerk (July 1, 1945 to November 15, 1953) Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk (February 10, 1947 to May 31, 1979) Jerome S. Adlerman, assistant counsel (July 1, 1947 to August 3, 1953) James E. Sheridan, investigator (July 1, 1947 to December 3, 1953) Robert J. McElroy, investigator (April 1, 1948 to April 24, 1955) James H. Thomas, assistant counsel (January 19, 1949 to February 15, 1953) Howell J. Hatcher, chief assistant counsel (March 15, 1949 to April 15, 1953) Edith H. Anderson, assistant clerk (January 26, 1951 to February 9, 1957) William A. Leece, assistant counsel (March 14, 1951 to March 16, 1953) Martha Rose Myers, assistant clerk (April 5, 1951 to July 31, 1953) Nina W. Sutton, assistant clerk (April 1, 1952 to January 31, 1955) SUBCOMMITTEE STAFF APPOINTED IN 1953-1954 Roy M. Cohn, chief counsel (January 15, 1953 to August 13, 1954) Robert F. Kennedy, assistant counsel (January 15, 1953 to August 31, 1953), chief counsel to the minority (February 23, 1954 to January 3, 1955) Donald A. Surine, assistant counsel (January 22, 1953 to July 19, 1954) Marbeth A. Miller, research clerk (February 1, 1953 to July 31, 1954) Herbert Hawkins, investigator (February 1, 1953 to November 15, 1954) Daniel G. Buckley, assistant counsel (February 1, 1953 to February 28, 1955) Aileen Lawrence, assistant clerk (February 1, 1953 to September 15, 1953) Thomas W. LaVenia, assistant counsel, (February 16, 1953 to February 28, 1955) Donald F. O'Donnell, assistant counsel (March 16, 1953 to September 30, 1954) Pauline S. Lattimore, assistant clerk (March 16, 1953 to September 30, 1954) Christian E. Rogers, Jr., assistant counsel (March 16, 1953 to August 21, 1953) Howard Rushmore, research director (April 1, 1953 to July 12, 1953) Christine Winslow, assistant clerk (April 2, 1953 to May 15, 1953) Rosemary Engle, assistant clerk (May 25, 1953 to March 15, 1955) Joseph B. Matthews, executive director (June 22, 1953 to July 18, 1953) Mary E. Morrill, assistant clerk (June 24, 1953 to November 15, 1954) Ann M. Grickis, assistant chief clerk (July 1, 1953 to January 31, 1954) Francis P. Carr, Jr., executive director (July 16, 1953 to October 31, 1954) Karl H. Baarslag, research director (July 16, 1953 to September 30, 1953), (November 2, 1954 to November 17, 1954) Frances P. Mims, assistant clerk (July 16, 1953 to December 31, 1954) James M. Juliana, investigator (September 8, 1953 to October 12, 1958) C. George Anastos, assistant counsel (September 21, 1953 to February 28, 1955) Maxine B. Buffalohide, assistant clerk (November 19, 1953 to October 15, 1954) Thomas J. Hurley, Jr., investigator (November 19, 1953 to December 15, 1953) Margaret W. Duckett, assistant clerk (November 23, 1953 to October 15, 1954) Charles A. Tracy, investigator (March 1, 1954 to February 28, 1955) LaVern J. Duffy, investigator (March 19, 1954 to February 28, 1955) Ray H. Jenkins, special counsel (April 14, 1954 to July 31, 1954) Solis Horwitz, assistant counsel (April 14, 1954 to June 30, 1954) Thomas R. Prewitt, assistant counsel (April 14, 1954 to June 30, 1954) Charles A. Maner, secretary (April 14, 1954 to July 31, 1954) Robert A. Collier, investigator (April 14, 1954 to May 31, 1954) Regina R. Roman, research assistant (July 15, 1954 to February 28, 1955) ACCOUNTS BY PARTICIPANTS Adams, John G. Without Precedent: The Story of the Death of McCarthyism. New York: Random House, 1983. Cohn, Roy. McCarthy. New York: New American Library, 1968. Ewald, William Bragg, Jr. Who Killed Joe McCarthy? New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984. Merson, Martin. The Private Diary of a Public Servant. New York: Macmillan, 1955. Potter, Charles E. Days of Shame. New York: Coward-McCann, 1965. Rabinowitz, Victor. Unrepentent Leftist: A Lawyer's Memoirs. Urbana: University of Illinois, 1996. Watt, Ruth Young. Oral History Interview, Senate Historical Office, 1979. ACCOUNTS BY WITNESSES Aptheker, Herbert, ``An Autobiographical Note,'' Journal of American History, 87 (June 2002), 147-71. Aronson, James. The Press and the Cold War. Boston: Beacon Press. 1970. Belfrage, Cedric. The American Inquisition, 1945-1960: A Profile of the ``McCarthy Era.'' New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1989. Reprint of 1973 edition. Copland, Aaron and Vivian Perlis. Copland Since 1943. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989. DuBois, Rachel Davis with Coran Okorodudu. All This and Something More: Pioneering in Intercultural Education: An Autobiography. Bryn Mawr, Penn.: Dorrance & Company, 1984. Fast, Howard. Being Red. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1990. Fast, Howard. The Naked God: the Writer and the Communist Party. New York: Praeger, 1957. Kaghan, Theodore. ``The McCarthyization of Theodore Kaghan.'' The Reporter, 9 (July 21, 1953). Kent, Rockwell. It's Me O Lord: The Autobiography of Rockwell Kent. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1955. Lamb, Edward. ``Trial by Battle'': The Case History of a Washington Witch-Hunt. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions, 1964. Mandel, Bill. Saying No to Power. Berkeley, Calif.: Creative Arts Book Company, 1999. Matusow, Harvey. False Witness. New York: Cameron & Kahn, 1955. O'Connor, Jessie Lloyd, Harvey O'Connor, and Susan M. Bowler. Harvey and Jessie: A Couple of Radicals. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1988. Seaver, Edwin. So Far So Good: Recollections of a Life in Publishing. Westport, Conn.: Lawrence Hill, 1986. Seldes, George. Witness to a Century: Encounters with the Noted, the Notorious, and Three SOBs. New York: Ballantine, 1987. Service, John S. The Amerasia Papers: Some Problems in the History of U.S.-China Relations. Berkeley: Center for Chinese Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 1971. Webster, Margaret. Don't Put Your Daughter on the Stage. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1972. Wechsler, James A. The Age of Suspicion. New York: Random House, 1953. Weyl, Nathaniel. The Battle Against Democracy. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1951. WITNESSES WHO TESTIFIED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, 1953 Ackerman, Lester Adams, John Aguimbau, Lawrence Alfred, Benjamin Allen, Jacob W. Amen, John H. Andrews, T. Coleman Antell, Louis Archdeacon, Henry Canning Arnot, Charles P. Aronson, James Arrigo, Augustin Arsenault, Jean A. Auberjonois, Fernand Auerbach, Sol (James S. Allen) Austin, Clyde Ayers, Stuart Ayman, David Back, Maj. Gen. George I. Balog, Helen B. Barrett, Edward W. Bauknight, Ralph M. Belfrage, Cedric Belgrave, Gordon Bennett, Herbert S. Bentley, Elizabeth Berger, Sigmond Berinsky, Stanley Berke, Sylvia Bernstein, Barry S. Berstein, Samuel Bert, Joseph Blattenberger, Raymond Bogolepov, Igor Bookbinder, Benjamin Bortz, Louis Bottisti, Albert J. Boye, Gunnar Boyer, Richard O. Bolys, Witoutos S. Brand, Millen Brashear, Dewey Franklin Bremmer, Sol Brody, Edward Brooks, Deton J., Jr. Brooks, John Starling Brothman, Abraham Brown, Donald R. Bruzzese, Larry Bryan, Julien Bryant, James M. Budenz, Louis Francis Burgum, Edwin B. Burkes, Carter Lemuel Burkhard, Henry F. Burrows, Albert Butensky, Seymour Buttrey, Capt. Linton J. Carlisle, John W. Cavanna, Paul Cernrey, Frank Chasanow, Abraham Chase, Allan Chiaro, Teresa Mary Coe, V. Frank Cole, Eugene H. Cole, Phillip L. Coleman, Aaron H. Compton, Wilson R. Connors, W. Bradley Cooke, Marvel Cookson, Thomas K. Copland, Aaron Corwin, Jerome Coyle, David Cushman Cragg, Earl Crenshaw, Craig Crevisky, Joseph K. Crouch, Paul Daniels, Dr. Fred B. Daniels, Cpl. Willie L. Davies, Bennett Delaney, Walter S. Delcamp, Raymond DeLuca, John Anthony Donohue, Harry Donovan, John L. Drake, Emma Elizabeth DuBois, Rachel Davis Ducore, Harold Duggan, James E. Duke, Russell W. d'Usseau, Arnaud Ehrendfeld, Alice Elitcher, Max Elliott, Maxwell Englander, Florence Epstein, Markus Evans, Gertrude Everhardt, Roscoe Conkling Evers, James Falk, Harry Fary, Leo Fast, Howard Feldman, Albert E. Fenn, Gen. C.C. Ferebee, Dorothy Ferguson, Esther Leemov Fernandez, Emanuel Finkelstein, Saul Finlayson, Donald R. Fisher, Phillip Fischler, Albert Fister, Edward J. Fleming, Alfred Forsyth, Rear Admiral Edward Culligan Francis, Joseph E. Francisco, Abden Freedman, David M. Freeman, Joseph Frese, Walter F. Fried, Dorothy Freidlander, Sidney Friedman, Lawrence Frolow, Jack Fulling, Virgil H. Furry, Wendell Gaboriault, Norman Galex, Irving Israel Gallagher, Maj. James J. Gebhardt, Joseph Arthur Gebo, Lawrence Leo Gelfan, Harriett Moore George, Arthur Gerber, Stanley Gerhard, Karl Giardina, Ignatius Gift, Charles Gisser, Samuel Paul Glassman, Sidney Goldberg, William P. Goldfrank, Helen Goodkind, Louis W. Goodwin, Robert Grottfried, Linda Greenberg, Solomon Greenblum, Carl Greenman, Samuel I. Gregory, Alexander Grogan, Mrs. William Gross, Alan Sterling Grundfest, Harry Guess, Cleta Hacko, Paul F. Hall, Alvin W. Hammett, Dashiell Hanley, Col. James M. Hansen, Kenneth R. Harris, Reed Hawkins, Herbert S. Hecker, Herbert F. Henderson, Donald Hermida, Higeno Herrick, George Q. Hewitt, Downs E. Heyman, Ezekiel Hindin, Alexander Hipsley, S. Preston Hiskey, Clarence F. Holtzman, David Homes, George Huberman, Leo Hughes, Henry Daniel Hughes, Langston Hunt, Mansfield Hutner, Eleanor Glassman Hutner, Eugene E. Hyman, Harry Iannarone, Ralph Inslerman, Hans Jacobs, Norman Stanley Janowsky, Seymour Jasik, Henry Jassik, Charles Jegabbi, Anna Johnson, Wendell G. Jones, Richard, Jr. Jones, William Johnstone Kaghan, Theodore Kaplan, Jacob Kaplan, Louis Kaplan, Louis Leo Katchen, Ira J. Katz, Max Kaufman, Mary M. Keiser, Morris Kelleher, Maj. James Kent, Rockwell Kerr, Mavlina M. Kitty, Fred Joseph Klein, Alex Henry Kohler, E.L. Kolowich, George J. Komar, Joseph Paul Kornfield, Isadore Koss, Howard Kostora, Lt. Col. Lee H. Kotch, Donald Joseph Krau, Maj. Harold N. Kreider, Cpl. Lloyd D. Kretzmann, Edwin Krummel, Lillian Lamont, Corliss Lautner, John Lawton, Maj. Gen. Kirke B. Layne, Joseph Linton Lee, Bernard Leeds, Paul M. Leeds, Sherwood Lenkeith, Nancy LePage, Wilbur Lepato, Abraham Levine, Martin Levine, Ruth Levine, Samuel Levitsky, Joseph Levitties, Harry William Lewis, Bernard Lewis, Helen B. Lewis, Napthtali Lichter, David Lindsay, Col Wallace W. Linfield, David Lipel, Bernard Lipson, Harry Lofek, Vachlav Lonnie, William Patrick Lowrey, Vernon Booth Lundmark, Carl J. Lyons, Edward J. Lyons, Florence Fowler Lynch, Michael J. Mabbskka, Karl T. Makarounis, Capt. Alexander G. Mandel, William Marx Mangione, Jerre G. Markward, Mary S. Martin, Bernard Martin, Pfc. John E. Matles, James J. Mastrianni, William J. Mathews, Troup Martinez-Locayo, Juan Jose Matousek, Helen Matson, John E. Matta, Sgt. George J. McJennett, John Francis, Jr. McKee, Samuel McKesson, Lewis J. McNichols, 1st Lt. Henry J., Jr. Mellor, Ernest C. Merold, Harold Miller, Leo M. Miller, Murray Miller, Robert C. Mills, Col. John V. Mills, Nathaniel Mins, Leonard E. Moon, Susan Moran, James M. Morgan, Edward P. Morrill, Donald Herbert Morris, Melvin M. Morris, Sam Morton, Thruston B. Mullins, Sgt. Orville R. Murphy, Curtis Quinten Murray, H. Donald Nachmais, Harry M. Naimon, Alexander Narell, Murray Nelson, Elba Chase Northrup, Robert Pierson O'Connor, Harvey Okun, Jack Oliveri, Joseph John Omanson, Sarah Owens, Arthur Lee Page, Paul D., Jr. Palmiero, Francesco Palmiero, Mary Columbo Pappas, Theodore Partridge, Gen. Richard C. Pastorinsky, Harry Pataki, Emery Pataki, Ernest Pataki, Vivian Glassman Peacock, Francis F. Percoff, Joseph H. Pernice, John Petrov, Vladimir Phillips, James B. Piekarski, Witulad Pomerentz, Samuel Pope, Lafayette Powell, Doris Walters Puhan, Alfred Rabinowitz, Seymour Rabinowitz, Victor Ranney, Russell Gaylord Reiss, Julius Rhoden, Sgt. Barry F. Rich, Stanley R. Riehs, Rudolph C. Rissland, Rudolph Robeson, Eslanda Goode Rogers, Lt. Col. James T. Rollins, Harold S. Rosenbaum, Terry Rosenheim, Irving Rosmovsky, Peter Rothschild, Edward M. Rothschild, Esther B. Rothstein, Jerome Ryan, Robert J. Sachs, Harvey Sack, Samuel Saltzman, William Sardella, John Saunders, John D. Savitt, Morris Schickler, John Schnee, Leon Schutz, Ralph Schmidt, Martin Scott, James P. Seaver, Edwin Seay, Perry Segner, Samuel Martin Seifert, Doris Seldes, George Service, John Stewart Shadowitz, Albert Shapiro, Philip Joseph Shapiro, Shirley Sharps, Sgt. Robert L. Sheehan, Capt. Benjamin Shoiket, Henry Sidorovich, Ann Sidorovich, Michael Siegel, Paul Sillers, Frederick Silverberg, Muriel Simkovich, John R. Singer, Bertha Smith, Newbern Snyder, Samuel Socol, Albert Solomon, Isadore Spence, Adolphus Nichols Spiro, Norman Stokes, Irving Stolberg, Sidney Stoner, Frank E. Studenberg, Irving Sussman, Nathan Swing, Raymond Gram Tate, Jack B. Taylor, William H. Thomas, Charles S. Thompson, James F. Thompson, Robert L. Toumanoff, Vladimir Treffery, Sgt. Wendell Ullmann, Marcel Ullman, William Ludwig Unger, Abraham Urey, Harold C. Van Kleeck, Mary Varley, Dimitri Vedeler, Harold C. Volp, Louis Walker, Alfred C. Walsh, James John Watters, Sgt. John L., Jr. Way, Kenneth John Webster, Margaret Wechsler, James A. Weinel, Sgt. Carey H. Weinstein, James Wells, O.V. Wells, Roy Hudson, Jr. Weyl, Nathaniel Whitehorne, Lt. Col. J.W. III Wilder, William Richmond Wilkerson, Doxey Willi, George Wolman, Benjamin Wolman, Diana Yamins, Haym G. Young, Philip Zucker, Jack Zuckerman, Benjamin PUBLIC HEARINGS OF SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOM- MITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS, PUBLISHED IN 1953 Eligibility Audits--Federal Security Agency, February 3 State Department--File Survey, Part 1, February 4, 5, 6 State Department--File Survey, Part 2, February 16, 20 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 1, February 16, 17 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 2, February 18, 19 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 3, February 20, 28 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 4, March 2 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 5, March 3 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 6, March 4 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 7, March 5, 6 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 8, March 12 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 9, March 13, 16, 19 State Department Information Program--Voice of America, Part 10, April 1, Composite Index Stockpiling--Palm Oil, February 25 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 1, March 24, 25, 26 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 2, March 27, April 1, 2 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 3, April 29, May 5 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 4, April 24 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 5, May 5 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 6, May 6, 14 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 7, July 1, 2, 7 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 8, July 14 State Department Information Program--Information Centers, Part 9, August 5, Composite Index Control of Trade with the Soviet Bloc, Part 1, March 30 Control of Trade with the Soviet Bloc, Part 2, May 4, 20 Austrian Incident, May 29, June 5, 8 State Department--Student-Teacher Exchange program, June 10, 19 Communist Party Activities, Western Pennsylvania, June 18 U.S. v. Fallbrook Public Utility District, et al., July 2 Security--Government Printing Office, Part 1, August 17, 18 Security--Government Printing Office, Part 2, August 19, 20, 22, 29 Communist Infiltration Among Army Civilian Workers, September 8, 11 Security--United Nations, Part 1, September 17, 18 Security--United Nations, Part 2, September 15 Communist Infiltration in the Army, Part 1, September 28 Commuist Infiltration in the Army, Part 2, September 21 Transfer of Occupation Currency Plates--Espionage Phase, October 20, 21 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 1, October 22, November 24, 15, December 8 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 2, December 9 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 3, December 10, 11 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 4, December 14 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 5, December 15 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 6, December 16 Army Signal Corps--Subversion and Espionage, Part 7, December 17 Korean War Atrocities, Part 1, December 2 Korean War Atrocities, Part 2, December 3 Korean War Atrocities, Part 3, December 4 WITNESSES WHO TESTIFIED IN PUBLIC SESSION, 1953 Abbott, Lt. Col. Robert Ackerman, Lester Adlerman, Jerome S. Allen, Maj. Gen. Frank A., Jr. Allen, James S. Aptheker, Herbert Archdeacon, Henry Canning Aronson, James Auberjonois, Fernand Ayers, Stuart Baarslag, Karl Balog, Helen B. Barmine, Alexander Bauer, Robert Beardwood, Jack Belfrage, Cedric H. Bell, Daniel W. Bentley, Elizabeth Berke, Sylvia Bernstein, Barry S. Blattenberger, Raymond C. Bogolepov, Igor Booth, William N. Bortz, Louis Boyer, Richard O. Boykin, Samuel D. Bracken, Thomas E. Brand, Millen Browder, Earl Budenz, Louis F. Burgum, Edward B. Buttrey, Capt. Linton J. Caldwell, John C. Carrigan, Charles B. Cocutz, John Coe, V. Frank Cole, Philip L. Coleman, Aaron Hyman Compton, Wilson R. Cooke, Marvel J. Conners, W. Bradley Creed, Donald R. Crouch, Paul Cupps, Halbert Daniels, Cpl. Willie L. DeLuca, John Anthony Dooher, Gerald F.P. Duggan, James E. d'Usseau, Arnaud Epstein, Julius Evans, Gertrude Fast, Howard Finn, Maj. Frank M. Foner, Philip Forbes, Russell Ford, John W. Francis, Robert J. Freedman, David M. Freeman, Frederick Fulling, Virgil H. Gelfan, Harriet Moore Ghosh, Stanley S. Gift, Charles Gillett, Glenn D. Glasser, Harold Glassman, Sidney Glazer, Sidney Goldfrank, Helen Goldman, Robert B. Gorn, Lt. Col. John W. Gropper, William Grundfest, Harry Hammett, Dashiell Halaby, N.E. Hall, Alvin W. Hanley, Col. James M. Hansen, Kenneth R. Harris, Reed Henderson, Donald Herrimann, Frederick Heyman, Ezekiel Hipsley, S. Preston Hlavaty, Julius H. Hoey, Jane M. Horneffer, Michael D. Huberman, Leo Hughes, Langston Hunter, Eleanor Glassman Hyman, Harry Jaramillo, Arturo J. Johnstone, William C., Jr. Kaghan, Theodore Kaplan, Louis Kennedy, Robert F. Kent, Rockwell Kereles, Gabriel Kimball, Arthur A. Kinard, Charles Edward King, Clyde Nelson Kitty, Fred Joseph Kreider, Cpl. Lloyd D. Kretzmann, Edwin M.J. Lamont, Corliss Lautner, John Leddy, John M. Lenkeith, Nancy Levine, Ruth Levitsky, Joseph Lewis, Helen Lewis, Naphtali Linfield, David Locke, Maj. William D. Lotz, Walter Edward, Jr. Lumpkin, Grace Lundmark, Carl J. Lyons, Roger McKee, Samuel McKesson, Lewis J. McNichols, Lt. Henry J., Jr. Maier, Howard Makarounis, Capt. Alexander G. Mandel, William Marx Manring, Roy Paul, Jr. Markward, Mary S. Martin, Pfc. John E. Mason, Arthur S. Matson, John E. Matta, Sgt. George Matusow, Harvey Mazzei, Joseph D. Meade, Everard K., Jr. Mellor, Ernest C. Merold, Harry D. Milano, William L. Mins, Leonard E. Moran, James B. Morris, Sam Mullins, Sgt. Orville R. Nash, Frank C. O'Connor, Harvey Pataki, Ernest Patridge, Gen. Richard C. Percoff, Joseph H. Petrov, Vladimir Phillips, James B. Piekarski, Witulad Pratt, Haraden Puhan, Alfred Reber, Maj. Gen. Miles Reid, Andrew J. Reiss, Julius Rhoden, Sgt. Barry F. Richmond, Alfred C. Ridgeway, Gen. Matthew B. Robeson, Eslanda Goode Rogers, Lt. Col. James T. Rogge, O. John Rosinger, Lawrence K. Ross, Julius Rothschild, Edward M. Rothschild, Esther B. Rushmore, Howard Sachs, Howard R. Salisbury, Joseph E. Sarant, Louise Saunders, John Savitt, Morris Schappes, Morris U. Seaver, Edwin Shadowitz, Albert Sharpe, Sgt. Charles Robert Shephard, Patricia Shoiket, Henry N. Shulz, Edward K. Sillers, Frederick Silvermaster, Nathan Gregory Sims, Albert G. Smith, Lt. James Smith, Newbern Synder, Samuel Joseph Socol, Albert Spence, Adolophus Nichols Spence, Clifford H. Stassen, Harold E. Stern, Dr. Bernhard J. Stolberg, Sidney Strong, Allen Sussman, Nathan Syran, Arthur G. Taylor, Donald K. Taylor, William C. Teto, William H. Thompson, James F. Tippett, Frank D. Todd, Lt. Col. Jack R. Toumanoff, Vladimir I. Treffery, Sgt. Wendell Ullmann, Marcel Ullman, William Ludwig Unger, Abraham Utley, Freda Veldus, A.C. Vernier, Paul Walsh, A.J. Watters, Sgt. John L., Jr. Wechsler, James A. Weinel, Sgt. Carey H. Wetfish, Gene Wilkerson, Doxey A. Wolfe, Col. Claudius O. Wolman, Benjamin Wolman, Diana Moldover Wu, Kwant Tsing Zucker, Jack RUSSELL W. DUKE [Editor's note.--The inquiry into the alleged influence- peddling of Russell W. Duke (1907-1978) in U.S. tax cases and his cooperation with Washington lawyer Edward P. Morgan (1913- 1986), was a continuation of similar investigations that the subcommittee had conducted during the previous Congress, but the subcommittee's new chairman, Senator McCarthy, had a personal interest in both these men. Russell Duke, who lived in Oregon, maintained close ties to Senator Wayne Morse, one of McCarthy's outspoken critics, while Edward Morgan had served as counsel to the Foreign Relations Committee subcommittee, chaired by Senator Millard Tydings, that examined McCarthy's Wheeling, West Virginia, charges about Communists in the State Department. The Tydings subcommittee rejected McCarthy's claims as a ``fraud and a hoax.'' In 1952, Morgan had campaigned against McCarthy's reelection. The subcommittee seized all of Duke's records in a garage in San Francisco, and subpoenaed all of Morgan's records relating to Duke. At the same time, a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee also investigated the case, and two members of that committee audited the Senate subcommittee's executive session. Duke was served with a subpoena on January 11, 1953. After testifying in executive session, he was informed that he would need to reappear to testify in public on February 2. But the public hearing was postponed ``until some other date to be designated.'' Duke was later instructed to appear on April 13, but had already gone to Canada. Informed that the subpoena was ``a continuing one,'' he was ordered to return. When he failed to appear, the subcommittee unanimously voted him in contempt. In November, Duke was arrested in Cleveland, Ohio, and brought to Washington to stand trial. On January 26, 1954, Judge Burnita S. Matthews of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia found him not guilty of contempt for failing to honor a subpoena in April that had originally been issued for January 15. Senator McCarthy vowed to issue another subpoena. ``If Duke refuses to obey this one, we'll have him cited again,'' he told reporters, ``and this time I hope his case is heard by a judge who knows the law.'' However, the subcommittee did not pursue the matter any further. Russell W. Duke did not testify in public session.] ---------- THURSDAY, JANUARY 15, 1953 U.S. Senate, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to Senate Resolution 251, agreed to January 24, 1952, in room 357 of the Senate Office Building, Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, chairman, presiding. Present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican, Wisconsin; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington; Senator Stuart Symington, Democrat, Missouri. Present also: Representative Kenneth A. Keating, Republican, New York; Representative Patrick J. Hillings, Republican, California. Present also: Francis D. Flanagan, general counsel; Robert Collier, chief counsel, House Subcommittee to Investigate the Department of Justice, Committee on the Judiciary; William A. Leece, assistant counsel; Robert F. Kennedy, assistant counsel; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk. The Chairman. We will have the record show that present are Senator Potter, Senator McClellan, Senator Jackson, Senator Symington, and Senator McCarthy, and Congressman Keating of the House Judiciary Subcommittee, and Congressman Patrick Hillings. Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I should report to you that pursuant to the resolution or motion adopted at the meeting of the full committee on yesterday, I have appointed as members of the minority of this subcommittee the following Senator Symington, Senator Jackson, and myself. The Chairman. Let the record show that yesterday in the full committee meeting with a quorum present, the motion was made, seconded and passed that the four Republican members, Senator Potter, Senator McCarthy, Senator Dirksen, and Senator Mundt, were confirmed as members of the subcommittee, and also confirmed were the members to be subsequently nominated or appointed by Senator McClellan, which has now been done. Mr. Duke, in this matter before the subcommittee, do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Mr. Duke. I do. The Chairman. Mr. Duke, before we start, I would like to make a suggestion, due to the fact that you are here without counsel. Time after time, witnesses have come and they have not been guilty of any criminal activity of any kind until they testify, and they make the mistake of thinking they can outsmart the committee and make the mistake of lying, in other words, committing perjury. So I would like to suggest to you for your own protection that you do one of two things: that you either tell the truth, or that you refuse to answer. You have a right to refuse to answer any question the answer to which you think might incriminate you. So I would suggest to you that for your own protection you either tell us the truth and nothing but the truth, or else avail yourself of the privilege of refusal to answer. TESTIMONY OF RUSSELL W. DUKE Mr. Flanagan.  Mr. Duke. Russell W. Duke. Unfortunately, I don't have any permanent address. Mr. Flanagan. Is Russell W. Duke your legal name now? Mr. Duke. It has been for years, yes, it is my legal name. Mr. Flanagan. Did you previously have another name? Mr. Duke. Yes. Mr. Flanagan. What was that? Mr. Duke. D-u-t-k-o. Mr. Flanagan. Where were you born? Mr. Duke. St. Clair, Pennsylvania. Mr. Flanagan. What was your birth date? Mr. Duke. February 11, 1907. Mr. Flanagan. When did you first begin to engage in the public relations business? Mr. Duke. I have--about 1934 or 1935. Mr. Flanagan. You have been engaged in that business continuously? Mr. Duke. Not continuously, no. Mr. Flanagan. When did you engage in any other business since 1934 or 1935, other than public relations? Mr. Duke. I have continuously been engaged in various businesses. I have been in the manufacturing business, in the sales business, the procurement business, the real estate business. Mr. Flanagan. When did you first begin to act as public relations counsel or representative in cases involving the federal government, such as tax cases, claims, and the like? Mr. Duke. In about 1946, '47, '48. Mr. Flanagan. Can you recite the number of cases, that is, federal tax cases, in which you were employed as a public relations counsel? Mr. Duke. Not until I look in my books to be able to tell you that. Mr. Flanagan. But you were employed in a number of federal tax cases as public relations counsel? Mr. Duke. I was. Mr. Flanagan. What were your duties and responsibilities, as you saw them, as a public relations counsel in a tax case? Mr. Duke. Well, I learned that in a lot of cases, upon investigating the case after the Internal Revenue Department got through with it, there were a lot of errors created by the agent that put a burden upon the taxpayer, over-assessed him various and sundry amounts that should not have been assessed, and I would engage certified public accountants to recheck the books, definitely determine if these over-assessments were justified or not, and then either call it to the attention of the Internal Revenue Department, the various heads of the Internal Revenue Department, and if they did not do anything about it, then advise the client to secure competent tax counsel. Mr. Flanagan. Are you an accountant? Mr. Duke. No, but I can do book work. Mr. Flanagan. Have you ever had any accounting training of any kind? Mr. Duke. Practical, yes. I was with Sears, Roebuck Company for seven-and-a-half years. Mr. Flanagan. As an accountant? Mr. Duke. No, in their legal department. Mr. Flanagan. What did you do in the legal department? Mr. Duke. I was assigned to various stores, and I had forty-six stores in eight states, and my position was to go to the various stores and go over their accounts and check them to see if there was any discrepancy in them, and find out if all of the accounts are live. Mr. Flanagan. You were an auditor, in other words? Mr. Duke. Not as an auditor; more of an investigator. Mr. Flanagan. Are you a lawyer? Mr. Duke. No. Mr. Flanagan. Can you tell us the names of the various counsel that you recommended in some of these tax cases that you were public relations counsel for? Mr. Duke. Oh, yes. I recommended probably in the past, prior to 1946 or 1947---- Mr. Flanagan. I am not talking about prior; I am talking of since then. Mr. Duke. Bob Murphy from Keenan & Murphy; Morgan, of Welch, Mott & Morgan--again, I would have to look at my files to refresh my memory, because I have recommended various legal firms. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever recommend Conrad Hubner, of San Francisco? Mr. Duke. On the coast I have, yes. Mr. Flanagan. Who else on the coast have you recommended as an attorney? Mr. Duke. Stephen Chadwick, quite a prominent attorney in Seattle, and I don't recall. Again, I would have to go into my files to check. Mr. Flanagan. Do you recall the specific cases in which you had an interest and in which Edward P. Morgan also had an interest as a lawyer? Mr. Duke. Some of them I can recall, but not all of them. Mr. Flanagan. Can you recite those that you can recall? Mr. Duke. There was Dr. Ting Lee, Wilcox---- Mr. Flanagan. Where was Ting Lee? Mr. Duke. Portland, Oregon. Mr. Flanagan. And the next case? Mr. Duke. And the Noble Wilcoxon case in Sacramento. Mr. Flanagan. Any others? Mr. Duke. Again, I would have to check the file. Mr. Flanagan. How about the Jack Glass case? Mr. Duke. I referred that to Morgan. Mr. Flanagan. How about the Guy Schafer case in Oakland? Mr. Duke. I referred that to Morgan. Mr. Flanagan. How about the Harry Blumenthal case in San Francisco? Mr. Duke. Well, that was a case wherein Hubner wanted me to get him counsel in Washington, and through me he associated with Morgan on that case. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever attempt to get Morgan in as an attorney in the Inez Burns case in San Francisco? Mr, Duke. No. I was requested in San Francisco some time ago to get information on the Inez Burns case back here, to find out why it was laying dormant in San Francisco. Mr Flanagan. Who requested you to do that? Mr. Duke. I don't recall whether it was the Burns attorney or whom, right at the moment, who it was, and I came back here and inquired of the Internal Revenue Department and told them that the case was laying dormant back there and it had been dormant for about two years, and they wanted to find out why it wasn't coming to a head. I couldn't find out anything, and so I requested Mr. Wilson, the administrative aide of Senator Knowland's office, if he would make inquiry of the Internal Revenue Department to find out why the Internal Revenue Department wasn't bringing the case to a head.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ George F. Wilson, administrative assistant to Senator William F. Knowland (Republican-California). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- He did find out, or learn why, and sent me a copy of the letter; and at the same date I was here, I inquired of Mr Morgan if he could aid me in finding out why the case was laying dormant, and that was about the gist of the Inez Burns case. Mr. Flanagan. Did Mr. Morgan find out anything for you? Mr. Duke. The letter is there, and will probably answer it best, and I don't recall what was in the body of that letter. Mr. Flanagan. Did he get a fee out of that case? Mr. Duke. Did he? Mr. Flanagan. Yes. Mr. Duke. I don't think so. I doubt it very much. I don't know. Mr. Flanagan. Now, how would you locate these tax cases, and how would you be brought into them? Mr. Duke. Well, there were various means, and some accounting firms would call me, and I knew quite a number of accounting firms on the coast, and I knew a lot of people that had friends that were involved in these tax cases who asked if I could help them out in any way. Mr. Flanagan. In other words, they would come to you? Mr. Duke. Some cases, in some instances, yes. Mr. Flanagan. In some instances did you go to them and suggest that they retain you? Mr. Duke. I sure did. Mr. Flanagan. Can you tell us a case in which you went to either the taxpayer's lawyer or someone connected with it, and told them that they ought to retain your services? Mr. Duke. The Wilcoxon case is fresh in my memory. Mr. Flanagan. That is the Noble Wilcoxon case at Sacramento? Mr. Duke. That is right. Mr. Flanagan. To whom did you go? Mr. Duke. I went to Mr. Wilcoxon. Mr. Flanagan. What did you tell him? Mr. Duke. I don't recall right now, I really don't. If you want me to tell you verbatim what I told him, I wouldn't recall. I could probably give you an idea. Mr. Flanagan. Give us in substance what you told him. Mr. Duke. I probably told him, knowing he was in tax difficulties, and asked him if he had competent counsel, and how far they had gone with it, and checked his records and books, and found probably a discrepancy in his records or books, where the Internal Revenue Department made errors, and then advised him that he should get Washington counsel, someone that had good legal training in tax matters. Mr. Flanagan. How did you find out that he was in tax trouble? Mr. Duke. I don't recall right now. Mr. Flanagan. You have no idea how you found out? Mr. Duke. I wouldn't say I have no idea. At the moment I haven't. If I could sit down and go through my files, probably there is something there that would refresh my memory. Mr. Flanagan. What is your best present recollection as to how that case came to your attention? Mr. Duke. If I gave you an answer to that, it would be just guesswork, and I really couldn't answer that until, as I say, I had checked through the entire file in the Wilcoxon case. Mr. Flanagan. I have here a letter, Mr. Duke, or a copy of a letter, dated September 10, 1949, which was taken from your files. This letter is addressed to Edward P. Morgan in Washington and, being a copy, it has your typed signature on it. We will put this in the record, but for the present I will just read certain paragraphs from it and ask you some questions about it. [The letter referred to was marked as committee's Exhibit, No. 11 January 15, 1953, R. W. Duke, and is as follows:] Portland 13, Oregon, September 10, 1949. Mr. Ed Morgan, Welsh, Mott & Morgan, 7100 Erickson Building, Fourteen Northwest, Washington, DC. Dear Ed: Since my conversation with you over the phone regarding Senator Morse, yourself, and myself discussed in your office, I can only repeat as I stated in my previous letter--Senator Morse, his integrity, honesty, and sincerity is something to be highly admired and respected. At no time have I ever known him to make an idle promise. I shall see that you will be given assurance in person immediately after the 12th of this month complying with the request you had made of me. Talent, Ed, is what I want. I am going to make my tour of the South (incidentally, Nevada and Idaho are good territory) and make one complete thrust to bring all the talent I possibly can to Washington. I understand there are 23 applications in Oregon for television. Can you confirm that? Well, Ed, oil lands in Oregon are going to surprise the nation. In delving through old records in the capitol recently, I ran across a survey and drilling tests that were made in a certain county by the Texas Oil Company, and their findings are so important that they will illicit from anyone who would go over them a thrilling surprise. At the time of the Teapot Dome scandal, Texas Oil Company, in conjunction with Sinclair Company, was contemplating stealing the leases for this particular area; sank seven wells; and each well was capped off as soon as Fall, Dohney, and Daugherty were indicted, and it has been a dead duck ever since. People filed homesteads on this particular land and have since cut out the forests for lumber purposes and have abandoned these lands. They are available from the country for the price of delinquent taxes, which among to $200 per 160 acre sections. If you can get a company to drill on this established oil land, would you be interested in my writing you in as a full partner in owning these various sections. As I stated above, your cost would be negligible. Let me know at the earliest possible date, and I will exercise the auctions. How are the horses running? I refer to Sir Laurel Guy, the Oakland owned horse, and the Sacramento owned horse. With best personal regards, I remain. Sincerely yours, R.W. Duke. Mr. Flanagan. In the second paragraph of this letter you say: Talent, Ed, is what I want. I am going to make my tour of the South (incidentally, Nevada and Idaho are good territory) and make one complete thrust to bring all the talent I possibly can to Washington. What did you mean there? Mr. Duke. Could I read the entire letter, and that would give me a better knowledge than just one paragraph. Mr. Flanagan. Yes. Mr. Duke. To answer that, it could mean quite a lot of things. It could mean cases on television. At that time there were a lot of applications from Oregon for television stations, and in fact, I understand this letter states there were twenty- three. It could mean most anything, it actually could, because we were at that time contemplating going into leasing oil lands through Oregon and Wyoming. So what it means now, I have no recollection of. Mr. Flanagan. Does it mean that you would search up cases, either tax cases or television application cases, or other cases involving the federal government, and refer those cases to Edward P. Morgan? Mr. Duke. It is possible that is what it meant. Mr. Flanagan. Well, does it mean that or doesn't it mean that? Mr. Duke. For me to say yes now, I can't bring my mind back---- Mr. Flanagan. Do you think it means that? Mr. Duke. It is possible that it does. Mr. Flanagan. Did you have any arrangement with Morgan that you would, as you say, bird-dog cases for him out in the West? Mr. Duke. Only in this respect: I had told him when I met him and found out that he was specialized in television, and he was specialized in tax cases, and he had taught taxes at one time, I told him that I had a lot of people out on the coast that approached me on cases, and would he be interested if I would send these cases to him; and he told me that he would have to talk to the attorneys, or to the clients of these people, and go into the matter of the case, and then he would determine after discussing it with the client and with the attorney whether he would take the case. Mr. Flanagan. What would you get out of such an arrangement? Mr. Duke. Well, if I ran across a case like that, I would try to sell my services as a public relations to him. Mr. Flanagan. Did you have any arrangement, directly or indirectly, with Morgan whereby you would get a forwarding fee? Mr. Duke. No, none whatsoever. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever have a discussion with Mr. Morgan in which he was going to set up a West Coast law office to handle some of these cases? Mr. Duke. I didn't have the discussion. Mr. Morgan stated at one time that there was a tremendous possibility for another legal office on the West Coast, because there were various attorneys here that had opened branches on the coast, and he was contemplating doing the same thing on the coast. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever obtain any money from Morgan? Mr. Duke. I borrowed some money from him, yes. Mr. Flanagan. On how many occasions did you borrow money? Mr. Duke. I only borrowed money from him one time. Mr. Flanagan. When was that? Mr. Duke. I don't recall. Mr. Flanagan. How much? Mr. Duke. It was $500. Mr. Flanagan. Did he pay you by check or by cash? Mr. Duke. He gave me a check. Mr. Flanagan. Did you sign any note or other evidence of the debt? Mr. Duke. I think I did, I am not sure. Mr. Flanagan. Did you pay it? Mr. Duke. I haven't had a chance. Mr. Flanagan. Is that the only occasion on which you got money from Morgan or his firm? Mr. Duke. That is right. Mr. Flanagan. Either directly or indirectly? Mr. Duke. That is right. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever pay any money to Morgan or his firm, either directly or indirectly? Mr. Duke. Indirectly, these clients that came there would be indirectly. Mr. Flanagan.  Mr. Duke. Not to my knowledge. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever split any fees with Morgan? Mr. Duke. No, I never split any fees with Ed Morgan. Mr. Flanagan. You never had a referral fee from him? Mr. Duke. No. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever send him a referral fee? Mr. Duke. No, not to my knowledge, I never sent him any money. Mr. Flanagan. You have read this letter of September 10? Mr. Duke. I have. Mr. Flanagan. I notice in the second to last paragraph it reads as follows: How are the horses running? I refer to Sir Laurel Guy, the Oakland owned horse, and the Sacramento owned horse. What are you talking about there? Mr. Duke. That again, I am not sure of. Right now I couldn't answer it. It might have been Sir Laurel Guy is a horse owned now by Senator Morse and it was shown here, and there is a Barbara Hunt in Sacramento that has a horse shown here, and I could have been referring to that. Mr. Flanagan. You say that Senator Morse at that time owned a horse named Sir Laurel Guy, a show horse? Mr. Duke. A show horse, and he just got through purchasing it. Mr. Flanagan. Was it from Oakland? Mr. Duke. I am not sure whether it was or not. Now I am not. At that time I possibly could have been. Mr. Flanagan. Is this reference to Sir Laurel Guy in fact a reference to the Guy Schafer tax case in Oakland? Mr. Duke. Not to my knowledge. Mr. Flanagan. Is it possible that it is a reference to that? Mr. Duke. It could be possible. Mr. Flanagan. Is it possible that your reference to a Sacramento horse is in fact a reference to the Noble Wilcoxon tax case? Mr. Duke. It could be possible. Mr. Flanagan. Do you mean to tell us that you can't recall whether you are talking about a horse or a tax case? Mr. Duke. I can't at this time, no. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever have any discussion with Morgan that you would refer to tax cases by the name of a horse? Mr. Duke. No. Mr. Flanagan. You never had any such discussion? Mr. Duke. That is why I don't recall what that is in reference to at this time. The Chairman. Did I understand you to say you do not know whether you are talking about a horse or a tax case? Mr. Duke. I don't recall right now. The Chairman. You do not know? Mr. Duke. I don't. If I might enlarge, Senator, this might sound asinine, but it is factual, and the doctors will verify it. I was in quite an explosion some time ago, and I have a malignancy in the upper antrum; and in feeding me Acth at the time of the explosion, the second and third degree burns, that has affected me, it really has affected my thinking, and there are a lot of things that I can go through there, and it takes me probably quite a few hours to refresh my memory on it. Senator Jackson. Why would you be talking about horses when you are writing a letter to an attorney who has nothing to do with horses? Mr. Duke. Well, we were rather friends, and we discussed horses, and we discussed a lot of things together. Senator Jackson. What else? Mr. Duke. I don't recall. It could have been horses or taxes or oil or it could have been hay or anything. Senator Jackson. How long have you been a friend of Morgan's? Mr. Duke. I don't recall what year I had met him, but I had met him---- Senator Jackson. About when? Mr. Duke. Again, I wouldn't be able to tell you until I would---- Senator Jackson. Well, ten years ago, or what? Mr. Duke. I think probably five or six years ago, and I don't recall. Senator Jackson. You were quite intimate with him? Mr. Duke. We got very intimate. Senator Jackson. You have been to his house? Mr. Duke. Yes. Senator Jackson. Made a lot of trips here to Washington? Mr. Duke. I sure did. Mr. Flanagan. Did you ever go to the horse races? Mr. Duke. No. I never have been to a hor