Senator MYERS. I think I asked this before. Did she appear fore this district board No. 4?

The CHAIRMAN. No.

Mr. BLAISDELL. I don't happen to have that.

Senator MYERS. They sustained the findings of the Secretary on the record, I surmise, that had been developed before the Senate Committee.

Per

Mr. BLAISDELL. That would be a surmise on my part, too, sir.
Senator TOBEY. Mr. Blaisdell, there is a phrase which has been
used so many times, and I confess I don't know what it means.
haps some of the other members might share my ignorance, although
I doubt it.

What is an hoc committee? What does it mean?
Mr. BLAISDELL. Temporary committee is all.

Senator TOBEY. Ad hoc committee means temporary committee.
Is that all?

Mr. BLAISDELL. That is all. Actually the reason it was established as a temporary committee, Senator, was that here had been an acculation of cases, and in order to get those cases taken care of we said, Let's appoint a committee to settle these things once and for all." So theory was that, having settled it, the committee would go out

4 business.

Senator TOBEY. What is the literal translation of ad hoc?

Mr. BLAISDELL. I am sorry, my Latin is too rusty. I plead orance temporarily for this purpose only.

Senator BRICKER. If you had been properly alerted or if the informaon which you did have and the reference to this acquaintance, woman acquaintance, through his family would have alerted you any curiosity as to availability, could you have had the records of FBI in regard to its investigation?

Mr. BLAISDELL. It would not have been normal practice, Senator, me to ask for the record, nor for them to make it available. The edure would have been for it to be made available to the personnel ers for their decision.

Senator BRICKER. In the Civil Service Commission?

Mr. BLAISDELL. The Civil Service Commission would make it availto the personnel officers in our department.

Senator BRICKER. Do you know whether that was done?

Mr. BLAISDELL. Mr. Gladieaux testified before the Senate investiing committee on that point and, to the best of my recollection, ndicated a check was made, a normal check, with the Civil Service mmission, and at that time nothing of a derogatory nature was wn and it was for that reason that they again approved the ap

atment.

Senator BRICKER. Even though the records in the FBI at that time show these contacts, did they not?

Mr. BLAISDELL. As the history shows, there was material available the FBI records from as early as 1944, I believe.

Senator BRICKER. How do you account for the fact that the Civil vice Commission didn't find that record or the FBI didn't reveal them?

Mr. BLAISDELL. I wouldn't be able to account for it, sir, because would involve a series of problems inside the Department of tice and their relation with the Civil Service Commission with which I have had no acquaintance. I don't know.

Senator BRICKER. When this question was raised the Secretar had no trouble in getting the information from the FBI, did he? Mr. BLAISDELL. I don't know about all the Secretary's dealing with the FBI.

Senator BRICKER. That was the reason he was discharged, the the Secretary got the information from the FBI?

Mr. BLAISDELL. As soon as the Secretary got the information from the FBI-the reason I don't know more about it is I was on the wes coast then when the incident took place, and when I got back found this action had been taken.

The CHAIRMAN. May I ask some questions, Mr. O'Conor?
Senator O'CONOR. Yes, sir, of course.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Blaisdell, do you know a Mr. Bruce, who wa Assistant Secretary of Commerce?

Mr. BLAISDELL. Oh, yes. He was my immediate predecessor, si if this action by this committee should be favorable. I know hi very well. I have known him for several years. I knew him b reputation prior to his appointment in the Department of Commerc The CHAIRMAN. What does he do now?

Mr. BLAISDELL. He is the United States representative in Pari under the European recovery program.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know an attorney

Senator O'CONOR. That is Mr. David Bruce?

Mr. BLAISDELL. Yes, sir. Mr. Howard Bruce is the Deput Administrator of ECA.

Senator O'CONOR. I think he is a cousin.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you know a Mr. Samuel Klaus, who is a attorney in the State Department?

Mr. BLAISDELL. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. In the testimony in the hearings on export polic and loyalty before the Expenditures Committee on page 332 I see thi testimony. Mr. Klaus was under examination. That is page 331 Mr. Klaus was being examined by Senator Ferguson's committee, an Senator Ferguson was interrogating him, and Mr. Klaus said this:

I felt that I had information in my own mind which was of great importanc and I felt that I had to tell this to somebody, and so I went up to see Mr. Davi Bruce, the Assistant Secretary.

And then, to continue with the testimony from page 332:

Senator FERGUSON. The Assistant Secretary of Commerce?

Mr. KLAUS. Yes.

Senator FERGUSON. What did you say to Mr. Bruce?

Mr. KLAUS. AS I recall it, I met Mr. Bruce going out of his own office on th fifth floor, and I said to him, "Could I speak to you in confidence? Alone?" an he said "Go ahead."

I said, "Is it true that William Remington is being appointed to OIT?" am giving you the best of my recollection of what the words were. He sai "Yes, he has been appointed. He is to work," I think he said, "with Thom Blaisdell." Then I said, "Well, this is embarrassing to me, because it is a matt of great confidence, but I feel that I must tell you that I understand, there a stories about town, that Remington is the subject of an active investigation f espionage."

Mr. Bruce said, "Well, it seems to me that before we agreed to appoint hi there were some questions raised about him, and that they were all satisfactori cleared up.' I said, "But these allegations I happen to know something abou and they are most serious."

I had the impression from what Mr. Bruce said that he thought the matter w cleared up or relatively unimportant, that is, the nature of the things alleged.

Senator FERGUSON. You did try to impress him that it was serious; that you ad information?

Mr. KLAUS. Yes; that wasn't the end of the conversation.

Senator FERGUSON. Go ahead. I thought you were through.

Mr. KLAUS. No, sir.

Then he said, "Well, in that event, I will take up the matter again"—

and I emphasize the word "again"

with Mr. Blaisdell." I think that we said a few other things in the course of ich I said, "Well, keep me out of this, because I am embarrassed. I have no position in your Department" (in other words, as a personnel officer). "I am merely here as an adviser, but I know this and I thought it should be brought to yr attention," or words to that effect.

Then he said that he would go to see Mr. Blaisdell. The last I knew of it on at score was a few minutes later I met him coming out of the elevator on the d floor, and he went into an anteroom of Mr. Blaisdell's. Whether he went see Mr. Blaisdell or not on that occasion I can't say.

My question is: Did you talk to Mr. Bruce about Remington about that time?

Mr. BLAISDELL. No, sir. I notice also that Mr. Bruce's answer to the questions, which apparently were given to him by phone, is in the form of an exhibit, exhibit 13, referred to at the bottom of the age, which simply says:

Have no recollection of the statement by Klaus regarding subject telephone versation. Believe Commerce Department files would indicate thorough rity check in normal fashion including FBI clearance.

Regards,

DAVID BRUCE.

The CHAIRMAN. You know nothing about that matter at all? Mr. BLAISDELL. No, sir. Mr. Klaus indicates he went to see Mr. Bruce. It is very strange he didn't come to see me. Mr. Klaus, after was an adviser under my direction, and I had been responsible for ing him to come over and look at these problems in the Department Commerce from the State Department, and I am unable to underad at all that if he knew this, why he didn't come to me instead of g to Mr. Bruce.

The CHAIRMAN. Maybe he wanted to talk to your boss. Maybe felt you were too close a friend of Mr. Remington, and he says he is embarrassed about it because he felt like he was intruding into other department.

Are there any other questions?

nator BREWSTER. If you felt that Mr. Remington had misled you important a matter as this appointment, would you feel that ld be ground for charges against him for removal?

Mr. BLAISDELL. No, sir. In view of the finding of the Loyalty Sard, I wouldn't believe so.

Senator BREWSTER. Now, I tried to point out earlier that it was an rely different problem involved. There are millions of people in & country whose loyalty would not be questioned, but they might o naive or so simple that you would not put them in responsible

itions.

It seems to me the only alternative to Mr. Remington-you have own him a long time and you evidently consider him to be a very ie man, but he did have these entanglements, not once but twice did get into these embarrassing positions. Now, you also say that if o had known that, you certainly would not have appointed him.

He came to you and talked with you. Now, do you feel that 1 did mislead you?

Mr. BLAISDELL. I tried, Senator Brewster, to indicate somewhat m feeling on that matter and to try to indicate what seemed to me be the feeling of a young man under those circumstances. No his statements were that he felt he had not intentionally, certainl misled me. Let n

Senator BREWSTER. He stated he felt he did mislead you. read his testimony:

Senator FERGUSON. Now, do I understand today that you want to leave t with the committee, that you in effect misled Blaisdell, he not having knowled of certain facts, that you stated it in such a way as to conceal certain facts? Mr. REMINGTON. To my very great regret, I now believe that I misled him.

So he seems to feel that he did mislead you.

Mr. BLAISDELL. Yes. I remember that particular statement, an then he goes on to say:

I believe Mr. Blaisdell did not get an impression which I wished he had receive The CHAIRMAN. There is a little double talk.

Senator TOBEY. Would you, Mr. Blaisdell, feel any sense righteous indignation that he kept this fact from you, these fac which were pertinent, of course, to the whole picture of his ava ability, and do you feel now a sense of indignation at that fact, how do you reconcile it in your own mind?

Mr. BLAISDELL. Senator, I am a father. I think you are, too. Mo of the gentlemen here are. I have a grown boy. He makes mistake I would have to say that Mr. Remington is in that category. would feel toward him

Senator TOBEY. He isn't a boy, is he?

Mr. BLAISDELL. I would feel toward him as I would toward a bo who had made a very serious mistake.

Senator TOBEY. How old a man is he?

Mr. BLAISDELL. He is about 31 or 32 at this time. He was in h early twenties when this matter took place, when this incident too place. At this time, a year ago, he was 30 or 31.

Senator BREWSTER. How old was he when you first knew him? Mr. BLAISDELL. He was in his early twenties.

Senator BREWSTER. He was in the Government then?

Mr. BLAISDELL. No. I think he came into the Government abo 8 years ago now, something like that.

Senator BREWSTER. I think even with your own son and whatev charity you may feel as to his intentions and his loyalty, that is n the question when you are putting him in a position of this characte I wouldn't want to put my own son in such a position if I feltMr. BLAISDELL. I agree.

Senator BREWSTER. You see the point?

Mr. BLAISDELL. I agree completely. I wouldn't minimize what h been done here at all.

Senator BREWSTER. If he were an unintelligent fellow, it might something very different, but all the evidence is that he isn't and y at least twice now he has been involved in these unfortunate affair to put them in the most favorable light, and then to put him in position of this responsibility I am sure, as you yourself have said, you had known all the facts, you wouldn't have it so. He said misled you. You do know the facts. It is a serious thing.

T

important point is I think with this record unsettled you could not ut him into the kind of responsible positions that were involved in

this case.

Mr. BLAISDELL. Yes. I would say that categorically and, as I said, I would not certainly do it even to my own son.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to ask Senator Bricker and Senator O Conor a question. They are familiar with this record that has been Lade and the inquiry that was made. The thing that puzzles me is FBI report.

They evidently made somewhat of an examination of this man's Background, and to whom did they report? What good are FBI ports if they just file them down there?

Senator BRICKER. It has always been a question in my mind, and at is what I was trying to bring out when I said Secretary Sawyer ad the report of the FBI and whether or not the Civil Service Comssion had the report of the FBI and why Mr. Blaisdell couldn't ave gotten it at the time he made the appointment if he were alerted to the question of the man's character.

Mr. BLAISDELL. Could I make a statement on that?
Senator BRICKER. Yes.

Mr. BLAISDELL. I think the findings of the Senate investigating
Emittee in this matter of the handling of FBI reports is one of the

constructive things which that committee accomplished, that did modify the Government procedure in the handling of reports re there might be any derogatory information.

In other words, instead of the case being held back in the files until The question was raised, it was put in a position, as I understand the cedure today, where the information was moved forward and inated to the Civil Service Commission that this was a case in which should look more carefully before you go ahead.

Senator BRICKER. The FBI reports were denied to congressional rumittees generally by order of the President on loyalty matters, ..the Attorney General following the direction, but there has never - a time when these reports were not available to the administradepartments of the Government, as far as I know.

Mr. BLAISDELL. I think that is correct, sir.

nator O'CONOR. There never was, however, any satisfactory lanation of why the Civil Service Commission didn't have access the FBI reports or were not supplied with the FBI reports, was

Mr. BLAISDELL. Not to my knowledge, sir, and I believe it was at point that you and Senator Ferguson and a number of others, elieve Senator Bricker was also a member of that committee, at you focused on that particular point and called attention to the great weakness of that point in the procedure; and I believe it - been corrected. It is one of the constructive suggestions that came of the investigation.

The CHAIRMAN. A note has been handed to me by a gentleman the audience, Joseph Rauh. The note reads:

I am counsel for Mr. Remington. I should appreciate a chance to clear up a ruatters briefly at the conclusion of Mr. Blaisdell's testimony.

I don't know whether we are through with Mr. Blaisdell, but if .* committee is willing, I will ask Mr. Joseph Rauh to come up re and if he wants to clear it up, all right, but whether you want.