10. Hearing of the Senate Internal Security subcommittee, December 3, 1953, p. 1230.
11. Maochun Yu, OSS in China, op. cit., p. 276.
12. Jung Chang, op. cit., p. 295.
13. Lucian B. Moody, “The Help Chiang Did Not Get,” The Freeman, July 16, 1951.
14. IPR report, pp. 204 et seq.
15. Testimony to House Foreign Affairs Committee, March 20, 1947.
16. Chennault’s testimony was given to the Senate Internal Security subcommittee on May 29, 1952, pp. 4673 et seq.; Badger testified before a joint session of the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees on the “Military Situation in the Far East” (the MacArthur hearings), June 19, 1951, pp. 2746 et seq.
17. David S. McLellan, Dean Acheson: The State Department Years (Dodd, Mead, 1976), p. 188.
18. The transcript of the Jessup-chaired policy conference is reprinted in an appendix to the IPR hearings, pp. 1581 et seq.
19. IPR hearings, pp. 1064–68; McLellan, op. cit., p. 204.
20. The relevant portions of the Acheson Press Club speech are reproduced in “Military Situation in the Far East,” loc. cit., pp. 1811–12.
21. Frank Dorn, Walkout: With Stilwell in Burma (Thomas Y. Crowell, 1970), pp. 76–82; “Well-Kept War Secret Gets Its Due,” Chicago Tribune, December 20, 1985.
22. W. W. Stuart, untitled memorandum, February 20, 1950, NARA RG 59, China, Box 18.
23. To the Secretary, from Dean Rusk, May 30, 1950, memorandum labeled “Top Secret,” concerning U.S. policy toward Formosa, NARA RG 59, China, Box 18.
24. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, Vol. VI, p. 280.
25. A noteworthy exception to this comment is Ronald McGlothlen’s Controlling the Waves (Norton, 1993), which discusses these events in some detail—albeit from a different perspective—and led me to some of the data referred to.
Chapter 32: The Battle with Benton
1. “Maryland Senatorial Election of 1950,” Report of the Committee on Rules and Administration, August 20, 1951, pp. 20 et seq.
2. “McCarthy and the Davis Incident,” Syracuse Post-Standard, October 19, 1951; and “The McCarthy Record,” Syracuse Post-Standard, March 15, 1953.
3. Howe to Benton, April 9, 1953, Benton papers, Box 5.
4. “Investigations of Senators Joseph R. McCarthy and William Benton,” report of the Senate Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections, 1952, pp. 12–13.
5. Benton to Moore, Moore to Robert Shortley, Gillette subcommittee archive, NARA, RG 46, SR 187, Box 15.
6. Subject Index, Gillette subcommittee archive, NARA, RG 46, SR 187, Box 1.
7. “Investigations of Senators McCarthy and Benton,” loc. cit., p. 14.
8. McCarthy exhibits 37, 17, testimony to Gillette subcommittee, July 3, 1952, NARA RG 46, SR 304, Box 1.
9. Howe to Benton, Benton papers, Box 5.
10. Cf. the Murray Marder story in the Washington Post for July 4, 1952, “McCarthy in Hearing Says Benton Aided Reds.” This portrays the hearing session as a shouting match between McCarthy and Benton and lists the people against whom McCarthy made allegations, but perforce provides no details about the cases or the documentation.
11. Griffith, op. cit., p. 175; Oshinsky, op. cit., p. 248.
12. Memorandum from Gerhard Van Arkel to William Benton, July 11, 1953; Benton draft letter to Sen. Guy Gillette(n.d.), Benton papers, Box 5.
13. Statement by Daniel Buckley, December 13, 1951, McCarthy papers I. Buckley would subsequently go to work as a McCarthy staffer and be subject to counterattack by pro-Benton forces.
Chapter 33: The Perils of Power
1. Quoted in Herman, Joseph McCarthy, op. cit., p. 209.
2. Anderson, Confessions of a Muckraker, op. cit., p. 303.
3. A deep-seated aversion to McCarthy is obvious in Eisenhower’s memoirs and even more so in his diaries. These reveal wholesale acceptance of the standard version of McCarthy (claimed 205 Communists, then backed down, and so on) and contain many other hostile comments. Of note is a diary entry quoting an Ike acquaintance as saying McCarthy and certain others in the Senate were “disciples of hate”—with no Ike disagreement. This was recorded in June 1951, well before Eisenhower reached the White House. (Robert H. Ferrell, ed., The Eisenhower Diaries [Norton, 1981], p.195.) For more comment on McCarthy, see Eisenhower, Mandate for Change: The White House Years (Doubleday, 1963), pp. 316 et seq.
4. See America’s Retreat from Victory, op. cit., pp. 24, 34, and others, all negative on Eisenhower, “who invariably sided with Marshall” (p. 34).
5. Among those Eisenhower didn’t like, in addition to McCarthy, were Sens. James Kem of Missouri, Styles Bridges of New Hampshire, John Bricker of Ohio, George Malone of Nevada, William Jenner of Indiana, and William Langer of North Dakota. Ike did, however, like Acheson ally Charles E. Bohlen. (See Chapter 36.) Republican Senators who opposed Bohlen were, in Ike’s view, “the most stubborn and small-minded examples of the extreme isolationist group in the party.” (Eisenhower Diaries, op. cit., p. 234.)
6. See Retreat from Victory, pp. 135 et seq., wherein McCarthy stated: “I regard the assistance we voted to Greece and Turkey as the most statesmanlike approach made by the Truman administration to the whole post-war problem of the containment of Russia.” McCarthy attributed the Truman Doctrine to the influence of James Forrestal, in contrast to the Marshall Plan, which he saw as the handiwork of the Acheson-Marshall combine. (McCarthy voted for the Marshall Plan, but later expressed regret for having done so.)
7. See Richard Nixon, Memoirs (Grosset & Dunlap), pp. 140 et seq.
8. For Taft’s views on Yalta, the Marshall mission to China, and other Cold War issues, see Robert A. Taft, A Foreign Policy for Americans (Doubleday, 1951).
9. For background on these matters see Eisenhower and Nixon memoirs, previously cited, Robert J. Donovan, The Inside Story (Harper, 1956), Emmet John Hughes, The Ordeal of Power (Atheneum, 1963), and Sherman Adams, First Hand Report (Harper, 1961).
10. Lodge had been a strong Ike supporter in the campaign for the 1952 nomination, entrusted with the task of assuring the party faithful that Eisenhower was, in fact, a Republican. Up until that point, no one had been quite certain. (See Mandate for Change, op. cit., photo following p. 75.)
11. See Richard Whalen, The Founding Father: The Story of Joseph P. Kennedy (Signet Books, 1966), pp. 416 et seq.
12. In this speech, delivered on January 17, 1949, John Kennedy denounced “the Lattimores and the Fairbanks” who had created a disastrous policy toward China. Quoted in Evans, The Politics of Surrender (Devin Adair, 1966), p. 294.
13. The relationship between McCarthy and Robert Kennedy is discussed, from differing ideological perspectives, in Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Robert Kennedy and His Times (Ballantine Books, 1979), pp. 106 et seq.; and Ralph de Toledano, RFK: The Man Who Would Be President (Putnam, 1967), pp. 53 et seq.
14. Roy Cohn, McCarthy (New American Library, 1968), p. 28 et seq.
15. Ibid., p. 47.
16. Cohn discussed his relationship with Robert Kennedy in many formats, including the book about McCarthy. Another was his brief memoir, A Fool for a Client (Hawthorn Books, 1971), devoted to his battles with the Kennedy Justice Department in the early 1960s. Kennedy would give his version in The Enemy Within (Harper & Row, 1960).
Chapter 34: Uncertain Voice
1. McCarthy papers III.
2. Fairly typical of such McCarthy statements is this: “I want to compliment the new Secretary of State for the attitude he has taken…I would like [also] to compliment the members of the committee…I have found that the Democrats on the committee have been just as eager and just as helpful in digging out anything that is improper, and just as careful of the rights of the witnesses, as members of the majority party….” McCarthy hearings (Voice of America), February 28, 1953, p. 222.
3. The exchange on this subject showed, again, the collegiality then prevailing. When Stuart Symington urged that anyone adversely
named in hearing sessions be called immediately to answer, McCarthy concurred and made this a rule of the subcommittee. Symington: “I want to thank the chairman for understanding the point, and I appreciate the position he has taken on it.” McCarthy hearings (VOA), March 2, 1953, p. 251.
4. Memorandum by Newsweek correspondent Samuel Shaffer, “Re: Joe McCarthy,” April 18, 1953. Document provided by Ralph de Toledano.
5. Willard Edwards, memorandum on McCarthy and the case of Gen. Ralph Zwicker, Papers of Willard Edwards. Document provided by Lee Edwards.
6. McCarthy executive hearings, January 27, 1953, p. 186.
7. McCarthy hearings (State Department file survey), February 20, 1953, pp. 126–28.
8. Annual Report, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, January 22, 1954, pp. 54–55.
9. “Waste and Mismanagement in Voice of America Engineering Projects,” report of the Senate Permanent subcommittee on Investigations, January 25, 1954.
10. McCarthy hearings (VOA), February 16, 1953, p. 7.
11. McCarthy hearings (VOA), ibid., p. 27.
12. McCarthy executive hearings vol. I, pp. 769–70.
13. Ibid., March 7, 1953, p. 792–93.
14. McCarthy hearings (VOA), March 5, 1953, p. 483.
15. Ibid., March 2, 1953, p. 227 et seq.
16. Ibid., February 20, 1953, p. 168.
17. Annual Report, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, January 22, 1954, p. 4.
18. Ibid., p. 10.
19. Reed Harris, King Football: The Vulgarization of the American College (Vanguard Press, 1932). Among the statements appearing in this volume: “Soviet Russia, a young nation which, whatever else may be said about her, is searching the world over for the best technical methods and the best ideas…has barred football from her new athletic program”(p. 24). “One of my friends on the Columbia faculty is, like my Princeton friend, a Communist…But there is tragedy in his eyes these days. He believes one thing and teaches another…He remembers the fate of others who disagreed—and remains silent” (pp. 148–49). And: “Among the students, the militant forward looking policies of the National Student League will bring new hope to the young people who must study in these fear centers [American universities]” (p. 158). The National Student League would later be described by FDR attorney General Francis Biddle as a “front organization for the Communist Party.”
20. McCarthy hearings (VOA), March 3, 1953, pp. 331 et seq.
21. Ibid., pp. 367, 368.
22. “Control of Trade with the Soviet Bloc,” Interim Report of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, July 21, 1953.
Chapter 35: The Burning of the Books
1. McCarthy hearings (information centers), March 26, 1953, pp. 73 et seq.
2. Ibid., pp. 79–80.
3. “State Department Information Program—Information Centers,” report of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, January 25, 1954, pp. 3–4.
4. Ibid., pp. 20–21.
5. McCarthy hearings (information centers), March 27, 1953, pp. 98, 111.
6. Ibid., April 1, 1953, p. 135.
7. Other testimony was given as to some anti-Communist documents and periodicals in the system, but these evidently numbered in the hundreds rather than the thousands.
8. “State Department Information Program—Information Centers,” report of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, January 25, 1954, pp. 3–4.
9. McCarthy hearings (VOA), January 25,1954.
10. Document provided by Herbert Romerstein.
11. “Supplemental Appropriation Bill, 1954,” hearings of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, June 15, 1953, p. 26.
12. Transcript of Eisenhower press conference, New York Times, July 2, 1953.
13. Report, “State Department Information Program—Information Centers,” loc. cit., p. 12.
14. Ibid.
15. McCarthy hearings (information centers), April 29, 1953, p. 197.
16. Nicholas von Hoffman, Citizen Cohn, op. cit., p. 173.
17. Kai Bird, The Chairman: John J. McCloy: the Making of the American Establishment (Simon & Schuster, 1992), pp. 408–09.
18. McCarthy’s view of Hammett was expressed at length in the Senate Appropriations Committee hearings above quoted, reproduced as an appendix to “State Department Information Program—Information Centers” report, pp. 18–19.
19. McCarthy’s volleys back and forth with Wechsler are in McCarthy hearings (information centers), May 5, 1953, pp. 289 et seq.
Chapter 36: Scott McLeod, Where Are You?
1. Hughes, op. cit., p. 11.
2. Ibid., pp. 52, 84, 97.
3. A rationale for this approach would be offered by Arthur Larson, an official of the Eisenhower administration, in A Republican Looks at His Party (Harper, 1956), which received much favorable press notice at the time. Eisenhower himself was partial to such notions, as evidenced in his diaries, op. cit., pp. 288 et seq.
4. Bird, op cit., Chapter 22.
5. Such is the generally accepted story. However, according to Richard Nixon, he was the one who dissuaded McCarthy from a public attack on Conant. Richard Nixon, Memoirs, op. cit., p. 139.
6. “Charles Eustis Bohlen,” FBI reports and memoranda, JEH & OC, Sections 38, 104, 105.
7. Congressional Record, March 25, 1953, pp. 2278, 2281.
8. Dulles phone log summaries and related memoranda, Eisenhower Library. Documents provided by Ted Morgan.
9. Hughes, op. cit., p. 85.
10. “Charles Eustis Bohlen,” FBI reports and memos, loc. cit.
11. The government stance on homosexuals in the federal service is discussed in David K. Johnson, The Lavender Scare: The Cold War Persecution of Gays and Lesbians in the Federal Government (University of Chicago Press, 2004).
12. “Hearings Regarding the Administration of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 and the Federal Civilian Employee Loyalty-Security Program,” Part I, House Committee on Internal Security, September 28 and 30, 1970. Text of Executive Order 10450, April 27, 1953.
13. JEH O&C, Section 105.
14. Ibid. 15. JEH O&C, Section 105, p. 11.
16. Ibid., pp. 14–15.
17. Congressional Record, March 26, 1953, p. 2385.
18. Hearings of Senate Foreign Relations Committee, “Nomination of Charles E. Bohlen,” March 2, 1953.
19. Congressional Record, March 25, 1953, p. 2285; March 26, 1953, p. 2386; March 25, 1953, p. 2295.
20. Charles E. Bohlen, Witness to History (Norton, 1973), p. 309.
21. Congressional Record, March 25, 1953, p. 2296.
22. Ibid.
23. Congressional Record, March 26, 1953, p. 2379.
24. Dulles phone logs, loc. cit. However, according to the memo of another conversation, Eisenhower did suggest to Dulles that security checks henceforth be conducted before making nominations.
Chapter 37: The Getting of J. B. Matthews
1. “Investigation of Un-American Propaganda Activities in the United States,” Special House Committee on Un-American Activities, August 19, 1938, p. 869.
2. Ibid., pp. 918–19.
3. “Investigation of Un-American Propaganda Activities,” report of the Special House Committee on Un-American Activities, January 3, 1939, p. 7.
4. “Reds and Our Churches,” American Mercury, July 1953 (reprint), p. 3.
5. Ibid., pp. 10–11.
6. Ibid., p. 13.
7. Matthews, for instance, quoted Earl Browder as saying to a group of theological students: “You may be interested in knowing that we have preachers, preachers active in churches, who are members of the Communist Party.” Odyssey of a Fellow Traveler (Mount Vernon Publishers, 1939), p. 9.
8. Remarks of Rep. Martin Dies, Congressional Record, February 1, 1943, p. 477.
9. Ibid.
10. “McCarthy Defeated and Matthews Ousted Because Opponents Attacked on Grounds of Their Own Choosing,” Congressional Report of th
e National Committee for an Effective Congress, July 22, 1953.
11. Letter from George Agree of the National Committee for an Effective Congress to Sen. William Benton, October 7, 1953, Benton papers, Box 5; NCEC newsletter, loc. cit.
12. Joseph Alsop, “No Surrender Now,” New York Herald Tribune, July 13, 1953.
13. Hughes, op. cit., pp. 94–96.
14. “Eisenhower Scores Attack on Clergy; McCarthy Aide Out,” New York Times, July 10, 1953.
15. Murray Marder, “Matthews Resigns as McCarthy Aide After Ike Condemns Attack on Clergy,” Washington Post, July 10, 1953.
16. Drew Pearson, “Tragedy of the Matthews Case,” Washington Post, July 11, 1953.
17. McCarthy hearings, “Security—Government Printing Office,” August 18, 1953, pp. 62 et seq., and August 19, 1953, pp. 72 et seq.
18. See, for instance, Kit Rachlis, “The Rise and Fall of Joe McCarthy,” Los Angeles Times, November 7, 1999, portraying the GPO/Rothschild investigation as a hit-and-run witch hunt.
19. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Annual Report for 1953, January 22, 1954, pp. 53–54; McCarthy hearings (Security—Government Printing Office), August 18, 1953, p. 28. (This comment followed a series of questions directed to FBI witness Mary Markward by McCarthy at the request of Rothschild’s attorney.)
Chapter 38: The Moles of Monmouth
1. Memoranda and correspondence concerning Signal Corps Intelligence Agency, McCarthy papers II and III.
2. Willard Edwards, “Secret Papers Missing, Army Sifts Red Plot—‘Loyal’ Group Asks Congress Probe,” Washington Times Herald, January 20, 1952.
3. “Administrative Admonition,” December 18, 1952, from Gen. George C. Back to Col. O. C. Allen, McCarthy Papers III.
4. Chronology and memoranda relating to G-2 investigation of Fort Monmouth, Captain Benjamin Sheehan, September 1954, together with memoranda discussing interviews with Sheehan by McCarthy staff. McCarthy papers III.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. “Army Signal Corps—Subversion and Espionage,” report of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, April 25, 1955, pp. 6, 20, 32, 33.
Blacklisted By History Page 80