There is a further description of the alleged activities of this character, Gershon, and the final paragraph contains a statement that Gershon is being held under $10,000 bond in the United States military stockade in Bremen. Mr. Phelps said he was preparing charges against Gershon. Mr. HUMELSINE. No, sir. Gershon is not and never has been an employee of the Department of State. The information I have is that Gershon was employed as a shipping clerk by the International Refugee Organization starting in the spring of 1948. However, this Mr. Gershon from time to time has claimed that he was an employee of the Department of State. Mr. ROONEY. Did you investigate that? Mr. HUMELSINE. It is being investigated at the present time. The United States High Commissioner's office in Germany is carrying on a complete investigation of this and other matters relating to Gershon. I have not received a final notification of how the investigation is coming along. Do you have any later information, Mr. Boykin? Mr. BOYKIN. We made some inquiries with respect to Gershon locally. It seems from all we could find out, as I remember the investigation, Gershon was a purser on a ship which was chartered by the Department of State during the war for the exchange of enemy diplomats. The Department of State, of course, had nothing to do with making him a purser on board ship but, because it had been chartered evidently Mr. Gershon feels that he worked for the Department of State which, of course, he did not. There was no connection other than that, if you can call that a connection. Mr. ROONEY. Are there any questions? Mr. FLOOD. No questions. STRICT APPROACH TO SECURITY EVALUATIONS Mr. PRESTON. I believe you stated categorically that you were of the opinion that this man Baldwin is not a Communist and has not been, based on your investigation? Mr. HUMELSINE. Mr. Preston, I could not state that categorically on any individual. Mr. PRESTON. In your opinion? Mr. HUMSELSINE. I say that my opinion did not come into it in the sense that I did not make the evaluation, but the evaluation made by Mr. ROONEY. Were you at the time of the evaluation the Deputy Under Secretary in Charge of Administration? Mr. HUMELSINE. No, sir; I was not. Mr. Peurifoy was, but I was his deputy at that time. But on the basis of an evaluation made by a man who I regard as very competent in this field, the decision was that the Department of State did not consider Mr. Baldwin to be proCommunist. Mr. PRESTON. Mr. Humelsine, during the last 3 years when your Security Section has appeared before this committee, I have been very much impressed with the sincere efforts that have been made to clear from the State Department any undesirable personnel. I think they have done a remarkably good job in that direction. In the case at hand I can see how your evaluator, taking in to account the commendations Mr. Baldwin had received from distinguished Americans, such as General Clay, who can hardly be called pink, who approved this man for his operations in Germany, in the limited. manner in which he operated, could reach the conclusion that he reached. While the report from the Committee on Un-American Activities convinces me personally that he is, indeed, a very confused individual, his philosophy reflects in my opinion a decided lack of understanding of true Americanism, although you may give him credit for a misguided desire to promote the aims and objectives of civil liberties groups, so that it is, perhaps, understandable why he has been chosen in the past for the specific type of counsel that he has given in the occupied areas under the jurisdiction of General MacArthur and Gen. Lucius D. Clay. In my opinion, he is not the type of person we should have allowed to go there and had I been called upon to pass upon him, the UnAmerican Activities Committee report alone would have convinced me that he should not have gone. I hope that this case will point up the necessity for even a stricter approach to this problem than you have taken in the past, and I think that you have really been keenly alert and constantly on guard against subversive activities on the part of any person either connected with the State Department or anyone who applied for a grant or for the right to travel abroad. We just cannot take chances with any of these people and, as you have so well stated previously before this committee, you consistently decide these matters, when they come before you for your personal attention, by giving the Government the benefit of the doubt. It is a policy you should continue to follow in making decisions relative to employees and special representatives of the Government. This man seems to be a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. On the one hand he has condemned the Communist Party and on the other hand he has given assistance to it, at times. It is gratifying to note, however, that he failed in his activities in Japan, Korea, and Germany to make any pro-Communist statements. Whatever activity he has engaged in of a doubtful nature has been confined to this country and under the constant surveillance of our own people. I think it is important that Mr. Clevenger brought this matter before the committee and I am glad to see that you have conducted such a thorough investigation of it both in this country and in Germany. We are always anxious to have matters of this type called to our attention, and this committee has been in the forefront in all of its hearings in trying to assist the Department in its effort to maintain the highest standards compatible with real Americanism. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Clevenger. Mr. CLEVENGER. Mr. Humelsine, I have just one question to which I should like a categorical answer, if I may have it. That is whether Mr. Baldwin received any per-diem compensation as a consultant in the 3 months that he spent in Germany, September, October, and November 1950. Has he been paid a per diem as a consultant, if you know? Mr. HUMELSINE. Not to my knowledge, sir. Are you talking now of the time during which he has been back? Mr. CLEVENGER. No; while he was there. Mr. HUMELSINE. No, sir. Mr. CLEVENGER. You brought him back, paying his transportation? Mr. HUMELSINE. I told you everything that was done for him. Mr. CLEVENGER. Then the answer is categorically "No," he has not been paid? Mr. HUMELSINE. That is right. Mr. CLEVENGER. That is the only question I wanted to ask. Mr. CLEVENGER. I made no charges against this man. I simply presented language alleged to have been used by him. We submitted a story of the Un-American Activities Committee and you have supplied evidence that might support a defense or an explanation. I do not think he can complain at all because some of these were very laudatory statements. Some of them, of course, came from sources and papers that have always supported the Civil Liberties Union position. But it was not my intention to injure him as a man, because I do not know him and I do not know anything about him. I made no direct charges against him. I am glad that he has gotten a case made for himself on both sides; one made by the committee and the other by the State Department. I thank you for the lengths to which you went in order to give us this information. Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Clevenger, I requested them to make this extensive investigation for the reason that I feel that when there arises any question concerning any person who receives as much as a penny of the funds appropriated by this committee, there should be laid on the table a full and frank discussion of the facts from all angles. I think the American public are entitled to that. Mr. CLEVENGER. I imagine that our bill this year will carry the same provision that no part of the moneys appropriated may be used to pay the salaries of any person who advocates the overthrow of our form of government by force and violence. Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Humelsine, you must have made inquiry of HICOG by cable or telephone when this matter was brought up by Mr. Clevenger? Mr. HUMELSINE. Yes, sir. Mr. ROONEY. Do you have a communication with regard to the total amount of moneys paid and whether or not he received a per diem during the time he was in Germany on the itinerary which has already been made a part of the record? Mr. HUMELSINE. The only thing I have relating to expenditures is the granting of the 1,000 Deutsch marks to Mr. Baldwin while he was in Germany. Mr. ROONEY. Where is that? Mr. HUMELSINE. He turned back 17 of them. The record shows that and also that the Department paid his fare back, $490. Mr. ROONEY. What do you have on this in writing? Mr. HUMELSINE. I have a cable that shows it. Here are the two items that refer to that. Mr. ROONEY. What if anything does it say previous to that with regard to moneys? Mr. HUMELSINE. Nothing. Mr. ROONEY. You may read that cable for the record. Mr. HUMELSINE (reading): Baldwin returned by air on flight 121 Pan Am November 21 at Government expense authorized by the Department in a Department cable. Baldwin received Deutsch marks 1,000 from HICOG, funds for incidental expenditures, mostly for luncheons with German Civil Liberties groups, for interpreter services and rendered detailed statement of expenditures, accounting for Deutsch marks 983. Balance of Deutsch marks 17 was returned. Mr. ROONEY. Very well, thank you. |