◆ SpookStack

I$ot Prinr io the formation cf the present Loyalty Board in the State Department there was a Board—I beleve it was re- ferred to as the Security BPoard—ana there wore sol Froud Men on that board bet, of course “they are no toner in the Depariment. $n 1943 that Board rec- omm.uded as follows with revard to this man s1one: In behalf of the above mentisned I is nded that action be iistituted to nite his eervices wito the State De- partment Immedcdistcly. The date of that, Inciucnéally, was Mareh, 22,1946. Tcontinus to quote from the Security Bord report: Tt t: suriested ta achieve tula purpose that an upprapriate ofieer of the Departments should inform Mr, Stune tiat his continued emplovment in the Department is emisare rassin. to the Desartment, and he shouid he given an opportunity to resign. If he should not resign voluutarilv, action showid be oiisn cu.dtely instttuted under Civil Service ule Wo, 8 to terminate his ecrvices Bith tie Sepactment. That was icsnored by Acheson, who was then Undersecretary of State, and jenored by Ston.’s immediate superisr, who was aman from Connecticut by the Name of Witntam Benton. Stone was werkin2 immediately under ENTON, As to some of Stone's adcit:onal activl- ties—incidentaly he formed a Wash- ington branch of the Institute of Pa- cific Relations together with Esther Brune ctr, whore husband revigned from the Navy while his leyalry case was pending, and who has been suspended, I understand, from the State Depart. ment, Stone was also invelved in innumer- eble Communisi-front activities. It perhons should also be mentioned that William Stone was the man who suc- ceeded in keeping George Shaw Whecler on in an important position in the State Depariument. Wheeler had beén or- dered discharecd from a key position in the State Department on the ground that ne Was an active and important member of the Communist Party. Wil- liam T. Stone, however, intervened in Wheeia’s benalf and succecded in kecp- ing him in his position. S'‘one labeled Wheeler as the ideal Stare Department employce. As the Senators will recall, Wheeler icit the United States and went behind the iron curtain, at which time he is.ucd # statement viciously con- demninz everything America stands for and applauding communism. On August 4, 1942—this is a matter of interest which is not in the Iectter of chargers, but I call it to the attention af the Sernale—cn August 4, 1948, Nathan Gresory Siivermasier, the exposed Com- Munist spy, testinecd under oath that William T. Stope cave him nayal-intel+ Mizgence records. At that time, Stone was Assistant Director of the Board of Economic Warfare, Stone, of course, will be cleared by Acheson's loyalty board. There fs no question about that, Apparently the reason why one of my colleagues iMir. BeExtowl has been squealing so loudly about McCartHy’s attacks on Commumists is that some of his friends, such as William T, Stone, ha. 1.6-—6 oa) re poing to be exposed. Stone's name Js aircady cropped up in the McCarran earings. As k said, the irnamediate su- Ferior a: Stone in the State Depart- ment was the Senator from Connecticut [Mr Devros td, The next case, Mr. President, is the enre of Herbert Fierst. Herbert Fierst is @ forcien-afieirs specialist in the De- partment of State. A memorandura of Aumust 2, 1946, by Mr, Bannerman, one of the security officers in the Depart. ment of Siute, is to the effect that physi-~ cal surveiiiance showed that this mon Fierst was in constant contact with members of an espionuze group and that he recommended Communists for State Department employment, and was en.caged in a number cf other Commu. nist activities. Incidentally the Lovally Review Board which post-audited the Fierst case about o'2 years ao, ater he had keen clesied and ordered it back to the Staite Th. partment and said, “We ave not satisfied with this, Yhis man is obviously ciLer a Communist or following the ine. We cannot approve having a man handing top secret material who is chumming with espionage arenis.” What do you think happened to tha easc? The State Department said, “The Cas? is closed,” Another is Marcia Ruth Harrison, di. visional assistant, Depariment of State. I wil not read ail the charges. One 1, that she belonged to a vast number of Communist fronts, plus a Communist rganization; that she belonged to the Young Communist League was a paid-up member of it. Next is Eobert Ross, radio informaticn specialist, Department of State. Mr. President, lam net going to read the letters of charges in all these cases, but I will give a few typical cases, The next is Hila M. Montague. She was born in Mussia in 1896. She worked for the Amiorg Trading Corp. The testimony before 3 different ecmmit- dees is inat only top mernbers of tha Communist Party could work for Amtorg, The Senate will recall thet 5 or 6 of the officers cf Amtorg were picked up about g@ year aco ond charged with csplonagve, Under pressure from the State Depart- ment they were ellowed to return to Fussig, Neai is the case of Olga V. Osnaich, At the time of our original investiga tlon she was not yet a citizen cf the Unite, States, She may have gotten her pavers sunes, but i do not know. She worked for the Rursian Embassy in Turney for S years. Then with the Russian Welfare Society and so forth. Ore of the signi. icant things here, of cou.se, is that the Russians do not hire pecrle in thetr em- basses wniess they are Communists. Another is Stella Gorden, also known es Estella Gordon, correspondent and re- eearch clerk, Department of State, Inci- centally, Mr. Presic-nt, I know thet afier Ihave given these cases and the summary of the letter of charges against some, there will be the usuul high-pitched screaming and squealing that McCarthy has done this under senatorial immunity. on CONGRESSIONAL RI CORD—SENATE Vad. a7 ae A 7 IO tYe a, 9919 ° I thought that charge should he laid to rest once and for all, so the other night before IT went on a television broadcast Iotcred the sponsovs to name these indi- viduals. The sponrors’ lawyers said “No, we do not want you to do thatv— and Ido not blame them. I think tt was g00d legai advice whic!. they gave be- cause, as Louis Budenz and some of the other top former Communists have testi- fied, up to 1945 the orders of the party to members were “Don’t under anv cir- cumstances sue. We dunct want ts bring the party into prominence in that way.” In 1945, according to the sworn testi- mony cf reputable witnesses like gudenz, the party line changed, and Communists have standing orders 0 sue in every case in which anyone was accused of Com- munist activity. They were told, “Sue, even though you have no chance of winning. If you can bring 5 or ly or 15 sults acninst a Man you can bliecea him white while he is Gos cewum them, anu toke up all his time, .uc he ca-. spend no iime .4 the Aght agains? comn.umsm.’”’ A good example was William Rerfing~ ton. The Senate wil} recall that Rem- ington was Named on 4 radio broxacast— Meet the Press, I belleve—as a mem- ber of the Communist Party. He promotiy filed suit, The radio chain and the insurance company, of course, had no access to Remington's files They could not prove thai he was the Com- miunist he was, so they paid him $10.00. The Senate knows that since thet time 2omineton has been ecnvicted. He was indicted 3. a New York grand fury and then ccnvicted: by a New York jury. The conviction was upheld by a evurt. Ii was 4 conviction based upon per- jury, wrin he said trat he was not a Commumst. In othcr words, he was found te be a member of the Comur ust Party. I mention that to show that I de not at all blame the sporsor for not want- x ome te mame vhe.c pecple cu his PrLcaram. Some inembers cf i.e press have ween shouting that McCrsridy hes been giv- ing this information under immunity, so I notified the three press services that if they would have representatives at my office at 16 o'clock te next morn- ing I would give them al. the informa- ticn about these indivicuals, and give them their names, if I eculd have some assurance that they wanted to print them, knowing, of course, that they would not, because al. cf us have had the expeience cf mornicers of the press telling us that they cannet use certain information because “it ught sublect their pocces to suits iu: lic] or slancer, Again, I do not biar them, beuau-e if 10 or 15 or 26 CL: rmizts sterud Libel anc’ slander act. against the newspapers it would cc.. them a for- tune, and they would 26 bk. sy defending lawsuits The three press errvices said. *No3 we will take the names but we wall give Fok no asauvanes tha. we will prins them.” To wes assured ov one of Une men that he knew thet under ma cure Cuinsiaices Would they vr.nt them wicks