23. Bill of Rights Ccmference of the Civil Rights Congress, sponsor (Daily
Worker, June 17. 1040).
24. Council for I'an American Democracy, open letter defending Luiz Carlos
Prestes, leading Brazilian Communist Party official (New Masses, De-
cember 3, 1940).
25. National Emergency Conference for Democratic Rights, signer of open letter
(Daily Worker, May 13, 1940).
26. New Masses, official Conuuunist periodical, signer of oi>en letter (New
Masses, April 2, 1940) .
128 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
27. Spanish Refugee Appeal, national sponsor (letterhead dated February 26,
28. Conference Asainst Anti-Communist Legislation, speaker (Washington
Times-Herald, April 28, 1948).
29. Citizens United to Abolish the Wood-Rankin Conmiittee, supporter (New
York Times, March 14, 1946, paid advertisement).
30. American Russian Institute, speaker (Daily Worker, May 20, 1947).
31. American Russian Institute, member, board of trustees (New York Times,,
December 12, 1947).
32. Statement in defense of Gerhard Eisler (Daily Worker, June 28, 1947).
Eisler is, of course, the notorious International Communist agent
who escaped on the Polish liner Batory last year. Incidentally, the
affection between these two was mutual, because Eisler spoke in praise
of Harlow Shapley in a piece entitled "My Side of the Story," page 6.
33. Conference on Cultural Freedom and Civil Liberties (PCA Politics, October
34. Committee of One Thousand, sponsor (press release, March 5, 1948).
3ii. Attack on United States P'oreign Policy in Greece (New York Times, Septem-
ber 10, 1947).
36". Committee for the First Amendment (pamphlet, p. 5).
Mr. Chairman, in their recent testimony before the Senate Appro-
priations Committee, both Mr. Acheson and Mr. Peurifoy stated that
homosexuals are regarded as poor security risks. These State De-
partment officials pointed out in that testimony that some 91 homo-
sexuals, whom they considered to be people of moral weaknesses, were
asked to resign from the Department.
I agree, and I am sure that no one here will disagree, with the official
position of the State Department; namely, that homosexuals are poor
Senator Tydings. Just a minute.
We will have a little less confusion in the chamber, please, a little
Senator McCarthy. The case I will now discuss involves a man who
is not only reported to be a homosexual, but he was arrested for sexual
Because of the sordid details of this case â€” and until the committee
has had ample opportunity to investigate the matter â€” I will not make
public the name of this man, but I will give to the connnittee the full
details concerning this case, including the name of the individual in-
volved, for their executive consideration.
This individual was employed in the Foreign Service and the State
Department until 1948 when he resigned for reasons unknown to me.
I had received information from several sources that this man
was a notorious homosexual. A check of the records of the Metropoli-
tan Police Department indicated that these reports were true. I now
hand the Chair, for your executive consideration, a copy of a police
report, together with a police photograph and the official biography
of this individual as it appeared in the State Department Register
of April, 1948.
I suggest that not be displayed.
Senator Tydings. The Chair will hold it until after the hearing,
and then we will have a short executive session if necessary.
The first name here is the last name, is it not, on that biography yoM
liave just given us?
Senator McCarthy. Let me look at the copy.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IX\E!STIGAT10N 129
Senator Tydings. The lirst name?
Senator McCarthy. The first name is the hist name.
All of this material, as I said, is being given for your executive con-
sideration, as I do not desire to make his name public at this time for
the reason stated above.
You will note from the police records that this man was arrested
on September 8, 1943. The charge was sexual perversion and the
police report states that he was known to hang out at the men's room,
at Lafayette Park in AVashington.
This man is getting about $i*2.U00 a year now.
He was chaiged with disorderly conduct in connection with his per-
verted activities. I do not have the record of the disposition of this
case available, but I am informed that he was required to post col-
lateral of $25 on this charge and forfeited collateral.
As I ])reviously said, this man resigned from the State Depart-
ment in 1U48 and shortl}- thereafter became employed in one of the
most sensitive agencies of our Government where he now holds an
important and high-paying position. I am prepared to furnish the
name of that agency for the executive consideration of this com-
Senator Tydixgs. Seiuitor McCarthy, you say it is one of the most
sensitive agencies of ours ? Is it the State Department ?
Senator McCarthy. It is the CIA.
Senator Tydixgs. He was in the State Department?
Senator McCarthy. He was in the State Department, in 1948, and
went from there to the CIA, that is the Central Intelligence Agency.
Senator Tydixgs. It is not under the State Department at the
present time, is it ?
Senator McCarthy. Let us make this clear, so the wrong man will
not be suspected : He is not one of the main officials in the CIA.
Senator Tydixgs. I understand that : but he was in the State De-
partment, according to your testimony?
Senator McCarthy. That is right.
Senator Tydixgs. He is not now in the State Department, but is over
working in the CIA ?
Senator McCarthy. That is right, and at a salary of somewhere
around ten or twelve thousand dolhirs a year, as I recall.
Furthermore, I have been informed that the files of the State Depart-
ment and other investigative departments of the Government contain
these and other facts concerning the homosexuality of this Federal
In view of this man's criminal record, which I have just presented
to the committee, and other information concerning his lack of moral
fitness, I am at a loss to understand why he was allowed to resign
from the State Department. I might say, in connection with that,
it seems unusual to me, in that we have so many normal people, so
many competent Americans, that we must employ so numy very,
very unusual men in Washington. It certainly gives the country an
odd idea of the type of individuals who are running things down here.
Again refeiring to ]Slr. Peurifoy's recent testimony before the Senate
A])propriations Committee. I wish to point out that Mr. Peurifoy
infoi'med that committee that he has experienced difficulty in having
security risks fired from the De])artment. In his testimony, Mr. Peuri-
foy said that at one point he reconnnended the dismissal of 10 poor
130 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
security risks from the Department under the provisions of the Mo-
Carran rider but that his recommendations were overruled and only
one of these men was fired.
He did state, I believe, the other nine were allowed to resign, I assume
so they could take over some other Government jobs.
As I said earlier in this statement, I do not know why the indi-
vidual who is the subject of my present case was allowed to resign;
but I think it is the responsibility of this committee to find out the
full facts concerning his resignation.
I also believe that the committee should immediately determine how
this individual was able to stay in the Department for almost 5 years
after he was arrested on a morals charge in Washington, D, C. I
also think the committee should find out how he, after leaving the
State Department, was able to get a top-salaried, important position
in another sensitive Government agency. It should be of considerable
interest to this committee to find out who sponsored this individual
or who intervened in his behalf in both the State Department and
his present place of employment.
I feel that this case is of sufficient importance for the committee to
take immediate action.
Would the Chair like to wait until they bring the copies for the
members of the committee, for the next case, or shall I proceed?
Senator Tydixgs. How long will it be, Senator?
Senator McCarthy. About a minute.
Senator Tydixgs. We will wait.
(There was a short pause.)
Senator McCarthy. JNIr. Chairman, before these are handed to the
press, I ask that these documents be marked "Exhibit 35."
Senator Tymngs. All right, Senator, proceed.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, this is one of those so-called old
cases, but it is very new in some respects. We find in this case, and the
Chair's staff should check on this immediately â€” in this case you will
find that the State Department's loyalty board has again picked up this
case very recently, and again they have given a clean bill of health to
However, a week ago last Friday, the Civil Service Commission's
appeals loyalty board, in this particular case, made what is known as
a post-audit. In that post-audit the case w^as sent back to the State
Department loyalty board, not only with the statement that they were
dissatisfied with the results but with the recommendation that the State
Department loyalty board that sat upon that case not be allowed to sit
upon it again, but that a new board be convened.
So, I want to make it clear, when I talk about this man's danger as a
security risk, that the Civil Service Commission has, as reecntly as a
week ago last Friday, rather wholeheartedly agreed, and went so far as
to say "We think you should have a different loyalty board sitting on
this case next time.''
This case is that of John Stewart Service.
This man is a Foreign Service officer of the Department of State and
at the moment is in Calcutta, India, where he is helping determine the
all-important policy of our Government toward India.
The name of John Stewart Servi(^e is not new to the men in the Gov-
ernment who nnist pass on a governmental employee's fitness as a se-
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVEISTIGATION 131
When Mr. Penrifoy testified before the Senate Appropriations Com-
mittee, he said that Service had been cleared four different times.
It is my nnderstandinji that the mnnbei- lias now risen to five and I
earnestly request that this committee ascei'tain immediately if Service
Mas not considered as a bad security risk by the loyalty appeal board
of the Civil Service Commission, in a post-audit decision, handed down
on March 3 of this year.
I understand that this Board returned the file of Mr. Service to the
State Department with the report that they did not feel that they
could give him clearance and requested that a new board be appointed
for the consideration of this case.
To indicate to the committee tlie im])ortance of this man's position
as a security risk to the Government. I think it should be noted that he
is one of the dozen top policy makers in the entire Department of State
on far-eastern policy.
He is one of the small, potent group of "untouchables" who year after
year formulate and carry out the plans for the Department of State
and its dealings with foreign nations; particularlv, those in the Far-
The Communist affiliations of Service are well known.
His background is crystal clear.
He was a friend and associate of Frederick Vanderbilt Field, the
Communist chairman of the editorial board of the infamous
Half of the editorial board of this magazine were pro-Communist
members of the State Department and the committee is in possession
of these names.
On June 6, 1945. the Federal Bureau of Investigation, after an ex-
ceedingly painstakino- and careful investigation covering months, ar-
rested Philip J. Jaffe, Kate Louise Mitchell, editor and coeditor of
Amerasia : Andrew Eoth, a lieutenant in the United States Naval Re-
serve stationed in Washington : Emmanuel Sigurd Larsen ; and John
Stewart Service, who were employees of the State Department â€” this is
the same John S. Service to whom I have just referred and wdio is pres-
ently representing the State Department in Calcutta, India; also
Mark Julius Gayn, a magazine writer of New York City, who is about
to leave for Russia.
I might say, Mr. Chairman, that while I believe some of the mem-
bers of the committee may be fully aware of the chronological record,
I think it is important that I put iii all the details for the record.
Senator Tydings. All right, go ahead.
Senator McCarthy. They were arrested on charges of espionage in
connection with the theft of the following Government records :
Classified documents from the State Department, including some top
secret and confidential classification 360
Prepared by ONI 163
Prepared liy MID 42
Prepared by OWI 53
From the files of the War Department 9
Now, some of the important documents picked np by the FBI at the
time of the arrest were as follows, and I call this to the committee^s
First: One document marked "secret" and obviouslv originating m
the Navy Department dealt with the schedule and targets for the bomb-
132 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY USTS'-EISTIGATTON
ing of Japan. This particular document was known to be in the pos-
session of Philip Jaffe, one of the defendants, during the early spring
of 1945 and before the program had been effected. Tliat information
in the hands of our enemies could have cost us many precious Ameri-
Second : Another document, also marked "top secret" and likewise
originating in the Navy Department, dealt with the disposition of
the Japanese Fleet subsequent to the major naval battle of October
1944, and gave the location and class of each Japanese warship. What
â‚¬onceivable reason or excuse could there be for these people, or anyone
else without authority, to have that information in their possession
and at the same time claim they are entitled to it because of freedom
of the press? That was the excuse they offered. They stole this docu-
ment for no good purpose.
Third : Another document stolen from the Office of Postal and Tele-
graph Censorship was a secret report on the Far East and so stamped
as to leave no doubt in anybody's mind that the mere possession of it
by an unauthorized person was a clear violation of the Espionage Act,
This was not an antiquated paper but of current and vital interest to
our Government and the Nation's welfare.
Fourth : Another document stolen was from the Office of Military
Intelligence and consisted of 22 pages containing information obtained
irom Japanese prisoners of war.
Fifth : Another stolen document, particularly illuminating and of
present great importance to our policy in China, was a lengthy detailed
report showing complete disposition of the units in the army of
Chiang Kai-shek, where located, how placed, under whose command,
naming the units, division by division, and showing their military
Many of the stolen documents bear an imprint which reads as
This document contains information aftVctinii' tlie national dofense of tlie
United States within the meaning of the Espionage Act, 50 United States Code
31-32, as amended. Its transmission or the revelation of its contents in any
manner to an unauthorized person is prohihited by law.
Despite the very small circulation of approximately 1,700 copies of
this magazine it had a large photo-copying department. According
to Congressman Dondero, who sjionsored the resolution for the inves-
tigation of the grand jury, this department was working through the
Flight, into the small hours of morning, and even on Sundays. It
could reproduce the stolen documents â€” and undoubtedly did â€” and
distribute them into channels to serve subversive purposes, even into
the clenched fists raised to destroy our Government.
In June 1944, Amerasia commenced attacks upon Joseph C. Grew,
who had during his stay in the State Department rather vigorously
o])posed the clique which favored scuttling Chiang Kai-shek and al-
lowing the Communist element in China to take over,
Larsen, one of the codefendants in this case, subsequently wrote a
lengthy report on this matter. I would like to quote briefly from parts
of that report.
Here is his quote :
Behind the now-famous State Department espionage case, involving the arrest
of six persons of whom T was one. an arrest which shocked the Nation on June 7,
1945, is the story of a highly organized campaign to switch American policy in
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 133
the Far East from its long-established course to the Soviet line. It is a story
which has never been told before in full. Many sensational, though little ex-
plained, developments such as the General Htilwell affair, the resignation of
Undersecretary Joseph C. Grew and Ambassador Patricli Hurley and the emer-
gence of a pro-Soviet bloc in the Far Eastern Division of the State Department,
are interlaced with the case of the six, as the episode became known. * * *
It is the mysterious whitewash of the chief actors of the espionage case which
the Congress has directed to the Hobbs committee to investigate. But from be-
liiiid that whitewasli tliere emerges tiie pattern of a major operation i)erformed
upon Uncle Sam witliout his being conscious of it. That oiteration vitally affects
our main ramparts in the Pacific. In consequence of this operation General
Marshall was sent on a foredoomed mission to China designed to promote Soviet
expansion on our Asiatic frontier. It was a mission which could not but come
to grief and whicli may yet bring untold sorrow to the American people.
Senator Tydixgs. Senator McCarthy, the report from which you
are readinj^ does not show whether or not you are still quoting Larsen,
but I take it that you are.
Do you see the quotation marks ?
Senator ^McCarthy. I will tell the Chair when I finish the quote.
Senator Tydixgs. If you will do that, we can follow it better.
Senator McCarthy. I will do that, sir.
How did it happen that the United States began to turn in 1944 upon its loyal
ally, the Chiang Kai-^hek Government, which had for 7 years fought Japan, and
to assume the spon^rship of the rebel Communist regime which collaborated
with the Japanese during the period of the Stalin-Hitler pact? How did it come
to pass that Washington since 1944 has been seeking to foist Communist mem-
bers upon the sole recognized and legitimate government of China, a maneuver
equivalent to an attempt by a powerful China to introduce Earl Browder and
William Z. Foster into key positions in the United States Government? How did
it transpire that our top-ranking military leader, General Marshall, should have
promoted an agreement in China under which American officers would be train-
ing and equipping rebel Chinese Communist units at the very time when they
were ambushing our marines and when Communists the world over were waging
a war of nerves upon the United States?
Whose was the hand which forced the sensational resignation of Under Sec-
retary of State Joseph C. Grew and his replacement by Dean Acheson? And
was the same hand responsible for driving Ambassador Patrick Hurley into a
blind alley and retirement?
The Chair will notice the quotation marks there. That will indi-
cate the end of that quotation.
In describing the arrest, Larsen had this to say about his arrival
at the office of the United States Commissioner :
There I found myself sitting next to John Stewart Service, a leading figure in
the pi-o-Soviet group in the China Section of the State Department, and to Lt.
Andrew Roth, liaison officer between the Office of Naval Intelligence and the
State Department, whom I also knew as an adherent of pro-Soviet policies.
Both of them were arrested separately the same night in Washington.
Larsen then goes on to describe John Stewart Service, John P.
Davies, Jr., and John Carter Vincent as the pro-Soviet group in the
China Section whose views were reflected by Amerasia and whose mem-
bers were in close touch with Jaife and Roth. In connection with this,
it will be remembered that John Service, as Stilwell's political adviser
accompanied a highly secret military commission to Yenan. Upon
the return of this mission, you will recall that Stilwell demanded that
Chiang Kai-shek allow him to equip and arm some oOO,()()0 Commu-
nists. Chiang Kai-shek objected on the grounds that this was part of
a Soviet plot to build up the rebel forces to the extent that they would
control China, (^hiang Kai-shek promptly requested the recall of
Stihvell and President Roosevelt wisely relieved Stilwell of his com-
134 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVE'STIGATION
mand. It was at this time that Service submitted his report No. 40 to
the State Department, which accordino; to Hurley, was a plan for the
I'emoval of support from the Chiang Kai-shek government with the
end result that the Communists would take over.
The espionage cases apparently had their origin when a British
Intelligence Unit called attention to material being published in
Amerasia which was embarrassing its investigations.
Preliminary investigations conducted at that time by OSS disclosed
classified State Department material in the possession of Jafie and
Mitchell. The FBI men then took over and reported that in the
course of its quest it was found that John Stewart Service was in com-
munication from China with Jaffe. The substance of some of Serv-
ice's confidential messages to the State Department reached the offices
of Amerasia in New York before they arrived in Washington. One
of the papers found in Jaffe's possession was document No. 58, one of
Service's secret reports, entitled "Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek â€”
Decline of his Prestige and Criticism of and Opposition to his Lead-
In the course of the FBI investigation Amerasia was revealed as
the center of a group of active and enthusiastic Communists or fellow
travelers. To give you a better picture of Amerasia, it perhaps should
be mentioned here that Owen Lattiuiore was formerly an editor of
Amerasia, and Frederick Vanderbilt Field, a writer for the Daily
Worker, was the magazine head. Mr. Jaife incidentally was nat-
ui-alized in 1923 and served as a contributing editor of the Defender,
a monthly magazine of International Laljor Defense, a Communist
organization, in 1933. From 1934 to 1936 he had been a member of
the editorial board of China Today, which was a publication of the
pro-Soviet American PMends of the Chinese People. At that time
he operated under the alias of J. W. Philips. Under the name of
J. W. Philips, he presided in 1935 over a banquet at which Earl
Browder was a speaker â€” speaking now of a man whom Service was
in close contact while in China.
He also lectured at the Jefferson School of Social Science, an avowed
Communist Party institution. He was also a member of the board of
directors of the National Council of American Soviet Friendship.
The New York Times, subsequent to his arrest, referred to him as an
active supporter of pro-Communist and pro-Soviet movements for a
lunnber of years.
According to an article in Plain Talk magazine Jaffe has been a
liberal contributor to pro-Soviet causes and that on one occasion
he reserved two tables at a hotel banquet held to launch a pro-Com-
munist China front in the name of "The Fifth Floor, 35 East Twelfth
Street," which incidentally happens to be the National Headquarters
of the Communist Party.
I realize that this history of JafFe's activities is unnecessary for most
of the members of this investigating body, but I feel that the record
should be complete so that anyone who reads it will understand the
background of the individual to whom his four codefendants had been
delivering secret State and War Department material. His coeditor.
Miss Mitchell, gave a party for John S. Service when he returned from
China. Service had previously attended a special press conference
held by the Institute of Pacific Relations, in which he supported the
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 135
position of the Chinese Communists. The committee will recall that
the California committee cited the Institute of Pacific Relations as a
Larsen had this to say about his codefenclants :
I knew JalTe and his group as the editor of a magazine which had almost
semiofficial standing among the left wingers in the State Department.
The niojht Kate Mitchell was arrested, she had in her possession,
accordino- to Conirressman Dondero. a hifrhly confidential document