of Major Carlson, who was telling you of his estimation of these
gentlemen, and you reported what his estimation was?
Mr. Hanson. That is right.
Senator Tydings. Had you at that time ever seen the two men to
whom the quotation refers?
Mr. Hanson. No, sir.
Senator Tydings. You had not?
Mr. Hanson. No, sir.
Senator Tydings. That is all.
Senator Green. Are there any further questions?
Senator Hickenlooper. Just to be sure that the chairman does
not understand that I was attempting to say that ]\Ir. Hanson had
said all this, I call his attention to the fact that I called attention to-
the Carlson quotations, and the only question I asked him was, did he
later come to that opinion himself?
Senator Tydings. The only object I had in asking these questions-
is that I got the definite opinion from Senator McCarthy's testimony
that there were the words of the witness, and not the words of Major
Carlson, and I wanted to clear that up be3"ond peradventure of doubt
at one place in the record, for future reference.
Senator Green. Are there any further questions or observations?
Senator McMahon. I will save those.
Mr. Louisell. Mr. Chairman, the exhibit to which Mr. Hanson
referred concerning his statement of duties with the Department of
State, 1942 to date, is available.
Senator Green. Will you give your name and so forth for the
Mr. Lotns'ELL. David W. Louisell, counsel for Mr. Hanson.
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 371
In case the text of Mr. ITansoii's letter to the chairman of this
<*oininittoc has not ah-eady been phiced in the record, we wonkl like
also to submit tliat.
Senator Green. If there is no objection. They are received as
exhibits 58 and 50.
Senator Hickexloopeh. i'on are a local \Yashine;ton attorney?
Mr. LoursELL. That is correct.
Senator IIkkexloopek. You are not connected with the Govern-
iNIr. Lot isell. Xo. sir.
Senator Green. Is there anything further? If not, the committee
(Whereupon, at 1*2:35 p. m., the hearing was adjourned, to recon-
vene on Wednesday, April 5, 1950, at 10 : 30 a. m.)
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 5, 1950
United States Sena-i-e,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Sl'BCOMMITTEE APPOINTED UnDER SeNATE RESOLUTION 231,
Washington^ I). C.
Tlie subcommittee met. pursuant to adjournment on March 28, 1950,
at 10: 30 a. m.. in the Caucus Room, room 318, Senate Office Building,
Senator Millard E. Tydings (chairman of the subcommittee) pre-
Present : Senators T^xlings, Green, McMahon, Hickenlooper, and
Senator Ttdings. The committee will come to order. Because we
liave asked the Avhole State Department Loyalty Board to be here;
and, because we have asked ^Ir. Seth Richardson to be here at 11: 30,
to explain the procedures of his Board, I would like to start promptly,
even though the full subcommittee has not come in, in order that these
gentlemen may return to their work and Mr. Richardson may keep
an engagement which lie has for the forepart of the afternoon.
Before proceeding with the matter, I would like to say that this
meeting this morning is called for the purpose of acquainting the
committee and the public with the procedures that are in effect in
passing on employees in the State Department, either for employ-
ment or after they are employed ; what steps are taken from time to
time and â€” how it is done â€” -to check the loyalty of the employees of
the State Department.
We are devoting this morning primarily to procedures, to find out
whether those procedures are adequate, and whether the gentlemen
who may testify have any recommendations to make, either in the
form of legislation, or any other form which will make the procedures
for the checking of loyalty cases of em])loyees in the Government more
effective than they are now, so that when you do testify, please keep
such thought in mind for the information of the connnittee.
Xow, I understand that it would be in the interest of orderly pro-
cedure if the first Avitness were to be Mr. Nicholson, who I believe is
in charge of this particular operation in the State Department.
Mr. Xicholson, will you hold \\\) your right hand.
Do you solemnly promise that all the evidence _you shall give in
the matter pending before this committee shall be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Nicholson. I do.
374 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
TESTIMONY OF DONALD L. NICHOLSON, CHIEF OF THE DIVISION
OF SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Senator Tydings. Give us first your name and occupation, as well
as your age.
Mr. Nicholson. Mr. Chairman, my name is Donald L. Nicholson,
44 years of age, I am presently Chief of the Division of Security of
the Department of State.
Senator Tydings. Where do you live, Mr. Nicholson ?
Mr. Nicholson. Chevy Chase, Md.
Senator Tydings, How long have you had this position ?
Mr. Nicholson. Since June 1948.
Senator Tydings. What did you do prior to that ?
Mr. Nicholson. Well, prior to that, let me go back and give you
considerable of my background
Senator Tydings. Just a brief account, not extensive, so we will
have some understanding of your experience.
Mr. Nicholson. I have an A. B. degree from Bucknell University,
and an LL. B. degree from George Washington University. After
graduating from George Washington, I accepted a position in the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and worked with the FBI until
Senator Tydings. Were you an FBI agent at one time?
Mr. Nicholson. Yes, sir.
Senator Tydings. How long has it been since you left the FBI?
Mr. Nicholson. I left the FBI in November of 1935.
Senator Tydings. How long were you with the FBI ?
Mr. Nicholson. From August of 1931 until November of 1935.
Senator Tydings. So you served there approximately 14 years
Mr. Nicholson. No, sir; until 1935.
Senator Tydings. How long would that be, 4 years ?
Mr. Nicholson. A little over 4 years.
Senator Tydings. And in the course of that experience, did you
have occasion to get statments in reference to individuals who were
under investigation by the FBI ?
Mr. Nicholson. Oh, yes.
Senator Tydings. Did you have occasion to notice the procedures
practiced by the FBI ?
Mr. Nicholson. Yes, sir.
Senator Tydings. I suppose from that experience, you have used a
great deal of the same technique and procedure in the State Depart-
Mr. Nicholson. That is correct. _
Senator Tydings. I think you have qualified yourself sufficiently so,
if you have a written statement, you may proceed to give it to us.
Mr. Nicholson. Mr. Chairman, I have no written statement, but
I do iiave and would like to present the over-all program from the
charts which are exhibited to my left, and photostats.
Senator Tydings. Before you do that, there is one other question
that ought to be in the record. â€¢ Â«> â€¢ i q^ ^
How long has this particular program been m ettect m the btate
Mr. Nicholson. The program I will discuss this morning was
established in the Department of State in 1947. â€¢
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 375
Senator Tydings. What time in 1947?
Mr. XiciioLSON. In the summer months of 1947.
Senator Tydixgs. How did it come about ^ Was it done by legisla-
tion or otherwise?
Mr. Nicholson. Partially by letjislation â€” well, not legishition, but
the President's Executive Order 9So5, which established the Presi-
dent's loyalty program.
Senator Tydixgs. So that this loyalty program was set up by Exec-
utive order of President Truman in the summer of 1947?
Mr. Nicholson. That is quite true.
Senator Tydings. There was no program prior to that time, com-
parable to this?
Mr. Nicholson. Tliat is correct, sir.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead, sir.
Mr. Nicholson. From the chart, I would like to present the loyalty
and security program in the Department of State as it exists today.
The charts, as I previously stated, are to my left â€” the large chart.
The members of the committee and of the press have copies of the
photographs of the chart.
I would like to start with the chart that is exhibited now, showing
the chain of command for personnel security in the Department of
State. You will notice that Mr. Peurifoy, the Deputy Under
Senator Tydings. Let me interrupt you long enough to say, when
you discuss each one of these charts, will you say, "I hand this one to
the reporter for the record," so the record will show what chart you
]Mark that first one as exhibit 60.
Mr. Nicholson. The first chart which has been introduced as ex-
hibit 60 reflects at the top that the command of the security and loy-
alty program is under the direction of Mr. Peurifoy, who is Deputy
Under Secretary of State for Administration.
Directly under Mr. Peurifoy is Mr. Boykin, who is Chief Director
of the Office of Consular Affairs. Within the Office of Consular Affairs
there are several divisions, one of which is the Division of Security,
of which I am Chief.
Senator Tydings. So, you come under Mr. Boykin.
Mr. Nicholson. That is right.
Senator Tydings. What is tlie title of your office?
Mr. Nicholson. Division of Security.
Senator Tydings. All right ; go ahead.
]Mr. Nicholson. Which is one of the divisions under Mr. Boykin's
As we move down the triangle to the operating staff, the Division of
Security shows myself as Chief. For the purposes of this particular
program, it is broken down into three branches which are significant
liere. First is the Investigation Branch which is headed by Travis
Fletcher, who has been an investigator of security work in the Federal
Government for well over 20 years; the Evaluation Branch, which
is crewed by sj^ecially trained evaluators of the current fronts. Com-
munist-front organizations. Communist Party lines, meaning and sig-
nificance of membership in organizations, the changes in the Commu-
nist line, and the whole areas that go to make up an evaluation of that
sort of information. That is headed by Mr. Joseph W. Emshey.
68970 â€” 50 â€” pt. 1 25
376 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
The other branch you will notice is the Foreign Service and Do-
mestic Security Branch, which is under Mr. Merrill Blevins, and under
that is our physical security, the document control in our Washing-
ton office, and' foreign missions; so that these three branches are the
heart, so to speak, of the loyalty security program.
Senator Tydings. Mark the next exhibit as B.
Mr, Nicholson. You will note one other point : That the large arrow
on the left shows that on February 18, 1947, Secretary of State Mar-
shall delegated to Mr. Peurifoy full authority for and responsibility
to carry out the loyalty security program of the Department.
As we move then to the next chart
Senator Tydings. Which is 61.
Mr. Nicholson. Which is exhibit 61, you will notice the chart is
headed "Enforcing the President's loyalty program."
Now, this chart, we must bear in mind, applies to employees who
were enrolled prior to October 1, 1917, which was the cut-off date as
established by the Seth Richardson Loyalty Eeview Board. Those
were persons who were employees of the De])artnient of State, and
that is the processing that is given them by the
Senator Tydings. By the State Department Loyalty Board?
Mr. .Nicholson. Yes, sir: and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Senator Tydings. Go ahead.
Mr. Nicholson. You will notice on the left, the wedges with little
round tops indicate employees who were on the rolls of the Depart-
ment of State as of the effective date of October 1, 1947, As of that
time, biographic sketches on all of the employees, fingerprint records
of all the employees were forwarded to the FBI for a check. In
processing, in the FBI, if the information came back that they had
no disloyalty data on those persons, they were moved over into the
cleared area. If the FBI had any information which raised any ques-
tion, questions of their loyalty, the FBI conducted a full field investi-
gation to run out all of the information pertaining to the allegations
or the information which they had. That full FBI investigation then
was submitted to the State Department Loyalty and Security Board.
Now, of that Board, the chairman, Mr. Conrad Snow, is here. He
is here todav, and will discuss this in more detail; that is, the opera-
tions of the Board.
Those cases were considered by the Board, the Loyalty and Secu-
rity Board of the Department of State, which would submit to Mr.
Penrifoy their recommendations for action.
Mr. Peurifoy then either followed their recommendation, either for
dismissal or for clearance, and if it was for separation the employees
had a right, under the Executive order, of appeal to the Secretary ; and
if tlie separation was upheld by the Secretary, had the right to appeal
to the Loyalty Review Board of the Civil Service Commission.
Senator Tydings. That is the Board that Mr. Richardson handles?
Mr. Nicholson. That is the Seth Richardson board.
Senator Tydings, All right; go on,
Mr, Nicholson, If the individual, after consideration by the De-
partment of State Board, was thouglit to be cleared, or the recom-
mendation was to clear him, that report and that decision is post-
audited by the Seth Richardson Board of tlie Civil S-^rvice Commission
before they go up into the large circle marked "Cleared."
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY IXVE?TIGATIOX 377
That does not mean that once the employees have p;one thi-ough this
l)roee(Iui'e they are cleared forevermore.
We have in onr OAvn Department, in my own division, a constant
screenino- and checking of our employees, over and above this immedi-
ate processing, so that if we see that, or have information that, any-
thing has gone wrong, or is going wrong, we have a complete investi-
gative staflP to run those ont and thus keep a constant check on our
Senator Tydings. So, if you get a report or a rumor or an allega-
tion, or circumstances unusual enough, there is a recheck and it is
run down until they are cleared again.
Mr. XicHOLsoN. That is true.
Senator Tydings. And in the event you find that a man on a recheck
probably should be separated, he has the right to go back to the Seth
Richardson Loyalty Review Board?
Mr. XicHOLsoN. If on our recheck we find that information indi-
cates that the person may be disloyal, that information will be turned
over to tlie FBI for a complete loyalty investigation and it then would
take this processing again.
Senator Tydings. I see.
Senator Lodge. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have him elucidate
a little bit more on this procedure that is followed, after the person
has been cleared and he or she is in the Department.
The original clearing, we will say, takes 3 or 6 weeks, whatever it is,
and then a long haul begins of work in the Department.
Mr. Nicholson. That is right.
Senator Lodge. Which, of course, is the important phase of it.
Nobody can do any harm while he is being considered. No damage
can be done until after they are in.
j\Ir. Nicholson. That is right.
Senator Lodge. Now exactly â€” do you just sit back and Avait for in-
formation on people, or for people to come in and tell you things, or
do you have an accurate supervision
Mv. Nicholson. No, Senator. We have an accurate recheck. We
do. of course, get tips and information from persons within the De-
partment that something may be wrong ; but we have an accurate pro-
gressive program on a recheck basis.
I would hesitate frankly in a public hearing to disclose all of the
techniques we use.
Senator Lodge. I do not want you to do that.
Mr. Nicholson. But it it an accurate and active progi-am. It is not
sitting back and being smug, but on security, it is moving things, and
to be sure that things are relatively safe.
Senator Lodge. Tell me as much as you can now. I realize tliat
some of these things have to be secret. I think the moi'e details you
can give the public about what you do, about after the people are in,
the more reassuring it will be.
Mr, Nicholson. What we do is, if persons for instance are going
into a code room, or in a sensitive area, we recheck everyb'jdv that goes
into the code room. As persons change jobs, we recheck the persons,
if they are going into higher positions, and things of that nature. We
have a constant check on the documents, so that if anybody becomes
careless with documents we know about it. We inve-^tigate the indi-
vidual, not only for carelessness, but as to what actually he does take.
378 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
to determine whether he does not take documents, and we check as to
why he is careless with documents and jack hnn up on that, and quite
frequently 20 so far as to suspend persons and reprimand them and
thiuffs of that nature, when they are careless with documents.
We frequently reinvestigate on our own, when we get information
from within or without the Department that persons are associated
with people that do not look right, and we have a constant â€¢
Senator Lodge. Outside of office hours ^
Mr. Nicholson. Yes, sir; and we have a constantly moving pro-
gram covering all of those things.
Senator Lodge. When they get a code, for instance
Mr. Nicholson. Get one?
Senator Lodge. When someone gets a code â€” â€”
Mr Nicholson. No one handles codes, as such, Senator. It is not
that type of an operation. We have a certain form of control over
what we call top-secret decuments and there are signed receipts for
the documents, and it is a document control.
Senator Lodge. Thank you. c â€¢ 1 i
Senator Tydings. Go ahead. Mr. Nicholson. Have you fauished
with exhibit 61 now? If so, take the next and call it exhibit 62.
Mr. Nicholson. Looking at exhibit 62, then, which is entitled
"Screening of Civil-Service Applicants," we must remember that our
previous chart showed the incumbents, the processing of mcumbenrs
who were on the rolls of the Department as of October 1, 194 (.
Senator Tydings. These are for new people coming m since Oc-
tober 1947. . . .â€ž ,r
Mr Nicholson. Now, we are moving into that specitic area, Mi.
Chairman. You will notice on the chart that the left part of the
chart is entitled "Security Screening." The applicants are designated
on the left, and before an a])plicaut comes into the Department, tliey
are completely investigated bv our own investigative stall ; and cer-
tain other applicants by law kre investigated by the Federal Bureau
of Investigation. That applies particularly to the Internationa iln-
formation and Education Exchange program in whicli there is a
specific provision of Congress that they be investigated by the Federal
Bureau of Investigation prior to appointment. v ^ ^i
Now, after those investigations are conducted on the applicants, the
reports are evaluated in the Evaluation Branch of the Division of
Security. Applicants who are investigated on the strength of seeking
employment with the Department, if there is anything m their record
that we do not like, we disapprove them as an applicant, and there
is- no right of appeal because they are not employees and they are dis-
approved for employment in the Department.
Now, if in our security evaluation the applicant is approved for em-
ployment, he or she is then enrolled as an employee.
That is where you come then to the large l)lack line up and down
the chart. , i ,
Senator Tydings. And then they go through the same processing
that thev went through on chart 61?
Mr. Nicholson. That is quite true.
Senator Titjings. From the beginning to end ?
Mr. Nicholson. That is true. i i 1 f
Senator Tydings. So that the new employee, after lie has had what
you might call preliminary screening and security clearance, must
STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION 379
then <:â– (> thi'oiiijli the whole process that tlie old employee had to go
throuiili who was on the roll prior to October 1047?
Mr. Xiciioi-sox. That is quite true.
I would like to iviake this exce})tion to that: AVe consider it more
than a preliminary screening; it is a full-blown investigation. We
know those peo))le when we bring them in, but as you say, it is quite
true that after they come in, then the President's loyalty program
comes into effect, and they go through the same procedure.
Senator Lodge. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Tydixgs. Yes, Senator.
Senator Lodge. A good deal has been made of the distinction
between checkinir someone for lovalty and checking someone for the
question of whether or not they are a bad security risk. Some people
may be perfectly loyal, but, for some reason or other, they are not
good security risks.
Xow, as I oathered. you endeavor to cover both aspects thoroughly ;
is that right '?
Mr. Nicholson. That is quite true.
Senator Lodge. You are aware of that distinction?
Mr. NiciioLSox. Yes, indeed ; yes, indeed.
Senator Hickexlooper. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?
Senator Tydixgs. Yes.
Senator Hickexlooper. I notice on your chart that you go through
the Department investigation and evaluation, and if the employee
clears that, he is then enrolled as an employee.
Mr. NicHOLSox. That is right.
Senator Hickexlooper. Then thereafter the FBI investigation
Mr. Xiciiolson. Well, it may not be an investigation. Senator Hick-
enlooper. It may be tins processing under the loyalty program
Senator Hickexlooper. I am just reading from the chart. It says
"FBI full field investiofation*" â€” after he becomes an employee.
INIr. Nicholson. That is where, in checking under the President's
loyalty program, there is information that the FBI may feel is such
that the loyalty investigation should be made.
Now those,- 1 can assure you, are very, very few in number.
Senator Hickexlooper. Then, in fact, unless something comes up
in either your investigation or other information that you get. there
is no full field FBI investigation of employees after thej become
employees of your Department.
Mr. NiciioLsox, That is quite true. However, they are checked
under the President's loyalty program, with the Federal Bureau of
Senator Hickexlooper. Is that check made before they become
employees, or afterward?
Mr. NiciioLsox. That is made afterward.
Senator Hickexlooper. The ]>oint I am trying to reach is this: As
to why it is not in the interest of efhciency and proper operation to
have them checked first, before they actually acquire the rights of
employees? There is a difference between an employee and an appli-
cant, in my judgment.
Mr. Nicholson. I quite agree with you.
Senator Hickexlooper. And you can either disapprove or reject
emplovmient of an applicant, much easier than you can discharge a
380 STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION
person after he becomes an employee, because then the I'ig^itsof appeal
and degree of proof probably changes a little bit, and yonr latitude is
cut down considerably, is it not ?
Mr Nicholson. I quite agree. , ,
Senator HrcKENLOOPER. iSid it just occurs to ine tha even though
the cases may be comparatively few, that even the file check with the
FBI and others should be done before the applicant actually ripens
into an employee with certain rights surrounding him.
Mr Nicholson. Well, the reason for that is that there are certain
ad^lni^We difficulties involved m it. Th^Bl -^-y^^^^^
check desire to have a fingerprint record, ^ow, it ib vei> ditticuit
?o1et a fingerprint record before the employee reports tor fl^ty J a
fingerprint chirt as the applicants are scattered all over the United
States â€¢ and it is quite difficult to get fingerprint charts.
Seiiatm HiCKENLOOPER. Now, do you do tins, Mr. Nicholson-I
realize that there may be some very pertinent ^^-^^J^j" ^^^^
practical to have a full field investigation by the FBI of e ei> appi
cant for a job, many applicants, there are no Pl^^^^^^^.l^v vou 'iu t do
is not a question of their security risks, or their M^^t^ yo ]i| do
not need themâ€” but is there any reason, or do you, I should sa} , ask loi
an FBI file check on applicanti for jobs during the course of your con-
sideration and before they become employees^
Mr. Nicholson. No, we do not. v 1 1 i i ^l.-p,i1 nnrl
Senator Hickenlooper. Would that not probably be helpful and
miffht, in a few cases turn up things _ i i^ -i.^,.v
Mr Nicholson. It may be, but it would require then a double check
of The FBI after we obtain the fingerprints, and under our mvestiga-
dons! we ai-e quite sure of people when we enroll them as employees.