Mr. BOYKIN. No.

Mr. HUMELSINE. I think, Mr. Stefan, in the early stages of this program there was no indication to the Civil Service Commission, and I believe that certain individuals who left the Department were hired by other Government agencies. I believe that point was covered in the Hoey committee report. Now, exactly what the status of those individuals is, I do not know. I believe that they were reinvestigated under the Hoey committee investigation.

UNAUTHORIZED USE OF CLASSIFIED MATERIAL

Mr. STEFAN. Do you know anything about confidential or classified material getting out of the Department during the past year and used for publication?

Mr. HUMELSINE. No; I do not personally know of any.

Mr. STEFAN. I mean unauthorized.

Mr. HUMELSINE. I do not know of any during the past year.

Mr. NICHOLSON. I do not know of any.

Mr. BOYKIN. I do not know of any.

Mr. STEFAN. No classified or security matter has gotten out of the State Department and gotten into the hands of people and been used for publicity purposes?

Mr. NICHOLSON. Not that I know of. There have been, as I recall, one or two leaks of information that we always investigate, but I think that our leaks in the past year have been nil. I do not specifically recall any in the past year. In 1948 I recall that we had a number of leaks that appeared in the newspaper columns, but in the calendar year 1950 I do not remember any.

Mr. ROONEY. When you were talking of leaks, were you also including embassies and consulates? Mr NICHOLSON. Yes

Mr. STEFAN. I assumed that he was.

Mr. ROONEY. I thought possibly you were talking only of the Department.

Mr. CLEVENGER. I think you will recall that the question was asked of the security officer 2 years ago if the other departments were put on notice and the answer was expressly they were by an Executive order forbidden to do so.

Mr. ROONEY. I cannot say that I-know of that.

Mr. CLEVENGER. If I had the record here I could find it. Mr. Peurifoy, in answer to a question that I propounded, said that they could not pinpoint these people.

Mr. ROONEY. I never heard of such a thing as that. Let me ask the witness.

Mr. BOYKIN. I never heard of such a thing.

Mr. CLEVENGER. I can look it up for you. It was in response to a question that I asked Mr. Peurifoy.

Mr. ROONEY. I do not recall any such testimony.

Was there ever issued an Executive order that prevented you from flagging a person whom you learned to be a homosexual or security risk so that he could not go to another Government agency? Did you ever hear of such?

Mr. BOYKIN. No, sir.

INVESTIGATION OF ALIENS

Mr. CLEVENGER. It is a matter of record in this committee. Such an answer was given to me, that they were ordered not to do that.

Now, I am thinking of this Hong Kong incident. You found a nest of five of them over there. There might be some more. Homosexuality has been reported to me to be more prevalent in the Near East and the East than it is in the West. Now, is there any real check made of these natives that you hire?

Mr. HUMELSINE. We make an investigation of the local employees, the alien employees, in the same manner as we make investigations of Americans. They are made by the regional security officers overseas. We have six regional security offices located in Paris, Frankfurt, Cairo, Manila, Mexico City, and Rio.

Mr. CLEVENGER. Yet you have found only 144 of all, American employees and natives?

Mr. HUMELSINE. The 144 that I referred to are Americans.

Mr. CLEVENGER. You have not listed the aliens?

Mr. BOYKIN. We do not have a record of the aliens.

Mr. HUMELSINE. When such a matter comes up in regard to an alien, we handle that by administrative action at the local post. It is an easy matter to do so. We just get them off the rolls.

Mr. CLEVENGER. I can see where that would be a bad situation and where some of these people might blackmail a homosexual in the United States.

Mr. HUMELSINE. We are alert to that. I would like to say that we have a post security officer at every one of our posts. That does not mean in the smaller posts that the man spends his full time on security, but there is a trained officer in each one of the posts who acts as security officer.

Mr. ROONEY. Are you sure it is a man that you can trust?

Mr. HUMELSINE. A man we can trust who is supervised by the regional security officer in his area. He has all of our people under constant surveillance from that standpoint. If the local employees are undesirable it is taken care of immediately by administrative action.

Mr. CLEVENGER. I am glad to know that. There is a big field of danger there.

Mr. HUMELSINE. It is a field of danger, and we are trying to be constantly alert to it and take rigorous action when required.

Mr. BOYKIN. I might mention that we made 5,914 investigations last year of people who were applying for jobs, and of that number we rejected 52 people for security reasons and 259 for character and suitability reasons. Those were Americans investigated. Regarding aliens investigated, we made 11,000 investigations last year, and of that number 654 were rejected for security and suitability reasons. Mr. CLEVENGER. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

NUMBER OF SEPARATIONS DUE TO SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS

Mr. ROONEY. We have discussed a few of your cases included in the 54 handled during the calendar year 1950. It appears that two or three of those cases first came to your attention when the local

police picked them up in Potomac Park or in other parts of the city of Washington. Can you tell us how many of the 54 cases originated from your investigations rather than from police action here in the District of Columbia?

Mr. BOYKIN. We cannot right now give you that figure but we will furnish it.

(The information referred to is as follows:)

During the calendar year 1950, 45 separations resulted from Division of Security investigations and 9 from police arrests.

Mr. ROONEY. How many cases have you disposed of in the current calendar year, 1951?

Mr. BOYKIN. I do not think we have that figure, but we will also supply that.

(The information referred to is as follows:)

In calendar year 1951 there have been four separations.

CASES PENDING

Mr. ROONEY. How many cases do you now have pending, both in the United States, and at foreign service establishments abroad?

Mr. HUMELSINE. I have given that figure-11 under investigation and 4 pending.

Mr. ROONEY. When you gave us the figure 11 under investigation and 4 pending, that was the up-to-the-minute figure? Mr. HUMELSINE. Yes.

SECURITY RIDER TO THE APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. ROONEY. It may be interesting to note at this point that it was the clamor raised by this committee in connection with last year's appropriation bill that brought to the surface the fact that there were homosexuals in the Department of Commerce. It is further interesting to note that in the table marked appendix 3 of the so called Hoey Senate committee report, made at the end of the last calendar year, that between January 1, 1947, and April 1, 1950, the Department of Commerce found no cases of sex perversion, but that in the period from April 1, 1950, immediately following our clamor, to November 1, 1950, they found 49 such cases. I think that it should be apparent that that was a result of the vigorous bout we had here in this room with Mr. Gladieux on the 27th of February 1950.

Now, referring to the so-called McCarran rider which originated in the mind of the eminent senior Senator from the State of Nevadaand this committee has gone along with him each year-it will be recalled that last year this committee wrote, not only the McCarran rider into this bill as it originated for the Department of State on the House side, but also wrote in a similar provision to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to summarily discharge anyone whom he considered a security risk.

Mr. STEFAN. That is true also of Defense, I think.

Mr. ROONEY. You will recall that that rider was inserted by us in the Department of Commerce's as well as the Department of State's part of the bill, and when we got to the floor of the House a point of

order was raised against both riders by the gentleman from New York, Mr. Marcantonio, and they were stricken out. Subsequently, and to circumvent the point of order, we went to the Rules Committee and got by the matter of Mr. Marcantonio's point of order by obtaining a rule which subsequently passed the House so that the bill, as enacted, contained the rider regarding both Departments.

What is the situation this year in the Department of State with regard to such a rider? Do you feel that it should again be included insofar as your Department is concerned?

Mr. BOYKIN. We have Public Law 733, which has been passed by the Congress, which gives the authority to certain Government agencies, including the Department of State, to dismiss people as security risks.

Mr. ROONEY. Is it not a fact that that law does not give you as much needed authority as the rider that I have referred to?

Mr. HUMELSINE. I was just waiting for Mr. Boykin to finish speaking. As far as I am concerned, and I have this responsibility, I would like to have the rider.

Mr. ROONEY. Now, there are one or two other items in this book that has just come out within the past week which contain a number of statements with regard to matters with which I believe I am familiar, and which I would like to inquire about. One of these items is a passage which reads as follows:

But the Department cannot free itself of the boondoggling tendencies, for at the same time it retains a personable and intelligent young lady to prepare a treatise on homosexualism, the purpose being to see if it is possible to cure or contain the deviates who remain on the rolls. Her assignment requires her to visit faggot dives, observe the queers in action, and ask them how they got that way. Is there any truth in any part of that passage?

Mr. HUMELSINE. To my knowledge, there is no truth in that what

soever.

Mr. STEFAN. Does that refer to the State Department?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes. You would know, of your own personal knowledge, of any intelligent and personable young lady who was visiting faggot dives with instructions from the Department?

Mr. HUMELSINE. We have personable and intelligent young ladies, but none engaged in that practice.

Mr. ROONEY. I am not talking about the practice; I am talking about anyone giving orders to visit such places.

Mr. HUMELSINE. No, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. Do you have any personable and intelligent young ladies directed to prepare a treatise on homosexuality?

Mr. HUMELSINE. No, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. The next passage intrigues me:

The following will be denied, but whenever possible the YMCA is vetoing the use of its facilities, especially the swimming pool, to all State employees, just to be on the safe side.

Did you ever hear of anything like that?

Mr. HUMELSINE. No, sir, and I am going to check on that.

FRIDAY, MARCH 2, 1951.

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

WITNESS

HAYWOOD P. MARTIN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

Mr. ROONEY. The next item is the Office of Personnel, which appears at page 203 of the justifications, which page we shall insert in the record at this point.

(The matter referred to is as follows:)

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

Mr. ROONEY. Does this page mean what it says when it alleges a decrease of two positions and a saving of $7,850 under the amount appropriated in 1951?

Mr. MARTIN. In the case of the Office of the Director, it reflects a larger number than we presented to you last year.

Mr. ROONEY. I know that. Have these offices, as well as your own, been reorganized in conformity with the recommendations of the so-called Hoover Commission?

Mr. MARTIN. Yes.

The Office of Personnel was established about a year and a half ago. There was a consolidation of the separate personnel facilities for the Foreign Service and the Department.

Mr. ROONEY. You have brought the Department and the Foreign Service personnel offices under one head, and you have been administering the whole organization since about a year and a half or 2 years ago?

Mr. MARTIN. Yes.

FRIDAY, MARCH 2, 1951.

OFFICE OF BUDGET AND FINANCE

WITNESS

EDWARD B. WILBER, BUDGET OFFICER

Mr. ROONEY. The next item is the Office of Budget and Finance, which appears at page 211 of the justifications, which page we shall insert in the record at this point.