He refers in here to a letter which was similar to this other letter, but I think it is unnecessary to reproduce it all, except perhaps the following: He was given certain courtesies as a visiting United States specialist. These courtesies consisted of access to Army facilities in Germany, Army PX, mess, housing, and transportation where

This is the same person who wrote for a magazine known as Soviet Russia Today and he wrote the following: "When the power of the working class is once achieved as it has been in the Soviet Union, I am for maintaining it by any means whatsoDictatorship is the obvious means in a world of enemies, at home and

ever.

abroad."

I can well understand why this would give this other Member some misgivings. Evidently there is no salary being paid, just transportation and the use of these facilities that I have mentioned.

Mr. ROONEY. Did I understand you to say that he declined the invitation?

Mr. CLEVENGER. He did at first, but he afterward visited Germany, volunteered his services. I did not think it necessary to put the letter in, the other one that I mentioned, because it is practically a duplicate.

Here we are in a war in which we are trying to contain communism and trying to establish free government and a so-called free world. I can well understand how this Member of Congress would express concern over a man whose political ideology is such as is indicated here. I have never seen the magazine and I am only quoting from the letter. But I cannot understand how on earth we could be inviting people in such an ideology to these places. It must have been well known, or else he would not have addressed such a letter like this to me.

I just mentioned it here because I wanted this Member of Congress to know that I have done what he suggested in his letter to me, made the inquiry of the State Department, and let the State Department answer it.

I do not suppose there is any objection to having the contents of the State Department memo in the record?

Mr. ROONEY. None at all.

(The letter referred to is as follows:)

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY,
February 28, 1951.

* * * Upon the recommendation of the Office of the High Commissioner, an invitation was extended to Mr. Baldwin to come to Germany. The Office of the High Commissioner had in mind providing assistance to a number of civil liberties associations which had been established and were being established in German cities. It was the belief of the Office of the High Commissioner that these associations needed assistance in properly organizing themselves and in bringing into clearer focus their concepts and objectives, and that Mr. Baldwin could be of material assistance to them in these regards. Although Mr. Baldwin did not accept the Department's invitation, he offered his services to the Office of the High Commissioner while he was in Germany.

* * *

Mr. CLEVENGER. And here is the letter to me, without the signature of the Member. I shall be glad to give that, if it is necessary, We sent some educators from this country who had a very doubtful affection for our particular form of government, to Japan. Most of

them, luckily, thank God, were returned. I do not know how the commander in chief ever got them back here, but he did.

It seems so futile for us to spend these millions that we do under these items and then have such ideologies spread through a man who holds such views, through a new government in Germany which we hope will be a stable, representative government. I do not know what they would call it, but I hope that they will have a real republic, and whatever they call it, that it will be a representative government of the people of Germany. I do not believe we can help in that by sending people with that sort of background, or even giving them the courtesies of an Army PX, or allowing them transportation or even exposing them to the people over there.

I am expressing some concern about this, along with this other Member of Congress who wrote me.

Mr. HICKERSON. Mr. Clevenger, this is completely outside of my responsibility and I will see that what you have said is brought to Mr. Humelsine's attention.

Mr. CLEVENGER. Mr. Humelsine already knows about it.

Mr. HICKERSON. And other appropriate officials of the Department. But it is wholly outside of my responsibility.

Mr. HALL. It relates to the High Commissioner of Germany. Mr. CLEVENGER. We were discussing UNESCO and appropriating money for people who may have similar ideologies to go to these other countries, at the expense of our Government. I note that in this case they say they are not paying him any salary. Of course, the sentiments expressed, as quoted in that letter, are certainly not those that we would regard as anti-Soviet in any way.

Mr. HALL. We will be glad to bring this to Mr. Humelsine's attention.

Mr. CLEVENGER. He got the letter from me.

Mr. HICKERSON. We shall bring your comments, Mr. Clevenger, to his attention.

CHANGES IN LANGUAGE

Mr. ROONEY. With reference to the language on page 22 of the committee print, why can we not strike:

together with such additional sums due to increase in rates of exchange as the Secretary of State may determine and certify to the Secretary of the Treasury to be necessary to pay, in foreign currencies, the quotas and contributions required by the several treaties, conventions, or laws establishing the amount of the obligation.

Mr. WILBER. Perhaps Mr. Hall can speak to that better than I.

RATE-OF-EXCHANGE ADJUSTMENTS

Mr. HALL. The reason for that is that from time to time there are small adjustments in the rates of exchange from the time that we estimate it until we get the payments, and this merely authorizes us to make those payments.

Mr. ROONEY. But we consolidated this appropriation for you to make it easier to meet unforeseeable or emergency expenses. I think we should take out this language, should we not?

81707-51- -43

Mr. HALL. If it is understood that we have that authority, I think it could come out.

Mr. WILBER. The only time we would need it would be when we might have to have an additional amount over and above that provided permitting the internal flexibility.

Mr. ROONEY. At that point you should be up here to see us.
Mr. HALL. Yes, sir.

ACQUIRING SURPLUS PROPERTY

Mr. ROONEY. What about the next change in language, which you propose to strike out? Why should not that be left in?

Mr. HALL. Because the necessity for this authority for acquiring surplus property no longer exists, as there is very little surplus property available. They have not been able to procure any in the last 2 years. Mr. ROONEY. Let us leave it in as a reminder that you might be able to use surplus property.

Mr. HALL. We have no objection to leaving it in, sir.

MISSIONS TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

WITNESSES

RICHARD S. WINSLOW, SECRETARY GENERAL, USUN

JOHN D. HICKERSON, ASSISTANT

NATIONS AFFAIRS

SECRETARY FOR UNITED

WILLIAM O. HALL, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND CONFERENCES

CARLISLE H. HUMELSINE, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

EDWARD B. WILBER, BUDGET OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Mr. ROONEY. The next item is entitled "Missions to International Organizations." It begins at page 25 of the committee print and page 353 of the justifications. At this point we shall insert in the record pages 353 and 354 of the justifications.

(The material referred to is as follows:)

Summary of requirements, fiscal year 1952

Appropriation, 1951 regular act.

Comparative transfer from "Salaries and Expenses, Department of State" for foreign service officers assigned to United Nations.

Deduct:

Savings under sec. 1214, Public Law 759..
Comparative transfers to:

"Operating Expenses, General Services Administration" for rents to
be paid by GSA.

"General supply fund, General Services Administration" in lieu of
surcharges on procurements effected..

Base for 1952

Net difference between 1951 and 1952:

INCREASE IN UNITED STATES MISSION TO UN

It should be noted that there is a requested increase of $128,918 over the 1952 base. Please explain the requested increase of $19,418 in the item, "United States Mission to the United Nations."

Mr. HALL. That is Ambassador Austin's office and the staff of the office, and it results from two factors: first, the application of the in-grade promotions in the office.

Mr. ROONEY. To what extent?

Mr. HALL. Roughly $17,000 is the cost of that. There are certain offsets against that, however. The balance of the net increase is due to increases in costs of other objects arising from increases in contractual services and purchases.

Mr. ROONEY. Why is it when you have reductions such as $2,200 in communication services and $6,700 in rent and utility services, that those reductions never inure to the benefit of the taxpayer but rather, someone thinks up means of spending the amounts for other purposes?