◆ SpookStack

SEGen an we - B35 - = t SRE er aes | ear. cane tt Tt UL pe) Uf, LOYALTY IN GOVERNMENT A little over eighteen months ago the junior Senator from Wisconsin an- nounced to a woman's club in Wheel- ing, W. Va., that he had in his hand 8 list of more than two hundred par- sons who “were known to the Secretary of State as being membera of the Com- munist party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.” The Senator waa, of course, Joseph R. McCarthy, and the speech waa the first of a series that, unfortunately, has not yet ended. The number of alleged Communista Mr. McCarthy has detected in and out of the State Department has been al- most as variable as the weather, but his theme has been consistent.- He has not, however, uncovered a single proven spy. In our view, this McCarthy ruckus | ful but also tragically unnecessary. It is often forgotten, but none the Jess true, that years before McCarthy had made any impact on the national scene a thoroughgoing loyalty and security program had been instituted for Gov- ernment employes under a Presidential order of March 21, 19847, Under this program the records of all employes or prospective employes of the Federal been not only tremendously harm- — a Government are checked against F. RI ernment are checked against F. B, files. If any derogatory data turn up, a “full field investigation” by, the F. B. 1. follows. The results are con- sidered by a loyalty board within the governmental agency concerned, at hearings to which the accused person hastright of counsel but, in order to protect confidential informants, no right to cross-examine or to be con- fronted by his accusers. Appeals may be taken to the head of the agency and finally to the centrai Loyalty Review Board. This program has been subject to criticism on the ground that the rights of the employe (or applicant) are not adequately protected, In the case of “security” ag distinct from “loyalty” riska, procedure in the various governmental agencies is far leas uniform, and in some respects much more peremptory. The President has lately asked the National Securit: Council to investigate this phase of the problem with a view to establish- ing more consistent standards, and per- haps setting up a central board of review similar to that whéeh-strtady exists for loyalty cases. | BPREBMterOoOsoOs re! Ysn a a a serene tien ee cae eaet nd elaaleie E E¥ sR ER Sra? 7 - ~ .._1 Jp, fact, the terms under which the loyalty and security inquiries we conducted are so broad that some critica feel they ere infringitig on tra- ditional American liberties. Every Gov- ernment employe has by this time been subjected to loyalty screening at least once and in some cases more than once, and some 330 have been dismissed as of June 30, The inquiries have been thorough and painstaking. The F. B.L has proved its worth too many times for anyone to doubt that. The various loyalty boards (headed in the State Department, for instance, by a New Hampshire Republican) and the Loy- alty Review Board (headed by a former Republican Senator from Connecticut) ate conscientious and non-political. The fact ia that the Goverament is and has been as well protected against disloyalty or subversion among its own employes as any Government could possibly hope to be. To save it from ita internal enemies it has not needed the reckless irresponsibility of a Sen- ator McCarthy or what President Tru- man decried this week as “the growing practice of character assassination.” }. Excursions into this politically tempt- ing field have been unnecessary, Un- productive and unconscionable. It is long past the time for demagogues and their political backers to recognize that “ ee ee et a et ee Ce. a ma. such tactics themselves constitute & danger to the strength and the stability f/ofr” 7 ae ny