As you know, it has been my instruction that the staff will be available to supply you with every bit of information in the possession of the committee.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Does the staff now have a list of the complaints? Mr. Moss. They have a list of the complaints which will be discussed today and, as has been the practice in each of the hearings, those have been prepared in duplicate.

Mr. HOFFMAN. Are all of the complaints in here?

Mr. Moss. The ones we are discussing today are in this file here. Mr. HOFFMAN. I would like to have all of the complaints they have received, if I may.

Mr. Moss. That information will be prepared for you, Mr. Hoffman. Mr. HOFFMAN. With the name of the complainant and the particular incident of which he complains, and the dates, so I may pinpoint the matter and find out, if I can, just what is wrong, if anything.

Mr. Moss. We will get you the information you seek. It will take a little time for the staff to complete the compilation of it in the exact form you want it.

Mr. HOFFMAN. I am not particular about the form, just so I know what the complaints are.

Mr. Moss. Mr. Fascell?

Mr. FASCELL. I hope we are not limiting our discussion on this matter to specific complaints which are in the file, which have been developed; because I know that I, for one, would be interested in the whole question of policy irrespective of any complaints which may have been received.

Mr. Moss. The material in the file has more or less to do with complaints developed to date. Any member of the committee is free to undertake questioning within the scope of the committee's assignment. Mr. FASCELL. Thank you. I am glad to see we agree upon the procedure.

Mr. Moss. The first witness this morning is Mr. Robert Tripp Ross, Assistant Secretary of Defense, Legislative and Public Affairs. Mr. Secretary, I understand you have a statement you would like to read to the committee.

Mr. Ross. I do have, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT TRIPP ROSS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, LEGISLATIVE AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS; ACCOMPANIED BY PHILIP K. ALLEN, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS; LEONARD NIEDERLEHNER, DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL; C. HERSCHEL SCHOOLEY, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INFORMATION; AND BERT SAYMON, LEGISLATIVE PROGRAMS DIVISION

Mr. Ross. My name is Robert Tripp Ross; I am Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative and Public Affairs. I would like at this moment to read into the record a short biographical sketch on myself. Mr. Moss. I wonder if I might ask you, before doing that, to introduce the members of your staff who accompany you here this morning. Mr. Ross. I shall be pleased to do so. I have with me the Deputy Assistant Secretary, Department of Defense, for Public Affairs, Mr. Philip K. Allen on my immediate right. On my far right, Mr. C.

Herschel Schooley, who is Director of Public Information, Department of Defense. On my far left is Mr. Leonard Niederlehner, who is Deputy General Counsel, Department of Defense. On my immediate left is Mr. Bert Saymon, who is in our Legislative Programs Division, Department of Defense.

Mr. Moss. Now you may proceed.

Mr. Ross. From March 1955 to date, I have been Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative and Public Affairs.

In 1954 to 1955, I was Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs.

In 1953, I was assistant to the chairman of the New York Republican State Committee.

In 1952, I was a Member of the United States House of Representatives.

In 1949 to 1952, I was vice president, sales manager, and public relations director of the Wynn Enterprises, Inc., at 200 Fifth Avenue, New York City.

In 1946 to 1948, I was a Member of the House of Representatives. In 1944 to 1946, I was with the Liggett Drug Co. in Boston as special assistant to the president.

In 1929 to 1944, I was with the Liggett Drug Co. in New York City. In 1927 to 1928, I was space salesman for the Cotton Trade Journal in New Orleans.

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee:

The Department of Defense appreciates this opportunity to appear before your committee and hopes that it can be of assistance in your study of this very important and complex matter of Government information activities.

As Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative and Public Affairs, I advise and assist the Secretary of Defense and the Secretaries of the three military departments on legislative, public information, and public relations aspects of Department of Defense policies, plans, and programs. I believe it would assist the committee if, at the outset, I generally outlined our organization as to these activities.

First, I should like to point out that Secretary Forrestal, by memorandum dated March 17, 1949, centralized all public information activities for the Department of Defense in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. The memorandum stated:

There is hereby created in the Office of the Secretary of Defense the Office of Public Information for the National Military Establishment at the seat of government. *** The Office of Public Information will be the sole agency for the National Military Establishment at the seat of government for dissemination of information to media of public information. * * *

On September 22, 1953, Secretary Wilson directed that responsibility for public information activities of the Department of Defense be assigned to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Legislative and Public Affairs. The public affairs activities are directly supervised by a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs, Mr. Philip K. Allen, whom I introduced a moment ago. At this point, I would like to read a short biographical sketch concerning Mr. Allen.

He has been Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs since the beginning of this year.

In the year 1955, he was executive assistant to Assistant Secretary of Defense for Legislative and Public Affairs.

In 1953-55, he was chief clerk of the Senate Armed Services Committee of the United States Senate.

In 1951-53 he was executive secretary of the Massachusetts Republican State Committee.

In 1949-51 he was legislative assistant to Republican leader of the Massachusetts House of Representatives.

In 1948-49 he was assistant to the dean of admissions, Harvard University.

In 1946-48 he was a member of the Massachusetts State Senate. In 1945-46 he was assistant counselor for veterans, Harvard University.

Mr. Allen has under him an Office of Public Information and Special Activities which is directed by Mr. C. Herschel Schooley, whom I introduced a moment ago, and I would like to read a short biographical sketch on Mr. Schooley.

Nineteen hundred and fifty-three to date, he was Director of the Office of Public Information, Department of Defense.

1950-53, he was Chief of the Office of Public Information Press Office.

In 1943-50, he was Navy public information officer, as a commissioned officer and as a civilian.

In 1937-45, he was director of journalism and speech, Hardin-Simmons University, and staff member of the Abilene Reporter-News. In 1925-36, he held editorial positions on the Mexico (Mo.) Ledger. In addition, under Mr. Allen, there is an Office of Security Review directed by Mr. Joseph S. Edgerton. Mr. Edgerton, I understand, is to be called at a later date; but I would like to read into the record a short biographical sketch of Mr. Edgerton.

1949 to date, he was director of the Office of Security Review, Department of Defense, as a commissioned officer and as a civilian. 1946-49, he was Executive Officer and Chief, Review Branch, War Department Bureau of Public Relations.

1945-46, he was Chief of the Army Air Force Station, Review Branch, War Department Bureau of Public Relations.

1941-44, he was in public relations and military duty.

1928-41, he was assistant city editor and aviation editor, the Evening Star, Washington, D. C.

1918-28, he was reporter, aviation editor and Capitol correspondent of the Washington Times.

In addition, the Deputy Assistant Secretary acts as chairman of a Public Information Coordinating Council having as members the Chiefs of Information of the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps, which meets regularly as an advisory group to consider policies, plans and problems. You will find a chart reflecting this organization under tab F at yellow tab A in the material previously furnished your committee.

With respect to our operations, the Department has previously furnished considerable detailed material in its response to your committee's comprehensive questionnaire. Accordingly, I believe it appropriate to confine this statement to a few brief general comments.

As stated in the introduction to our reply to the questionnaire, the fundamental approach of the Department of Defense in carrying out its day-to-day information activities is that it strongly believes that

there must be a fully informed Congress and public, and that it exercises every effort to make available the maximum information in its possession, consistent with the national interest.

The right of the American people to know about our military activities, and the Defense Department's responsibility to keep the public informed about these activities without endangering our national security, are principles which form the very basis of our public information policy. Secretary Wilson, in a directive dated March 29, 1955, stated:

The people of the United States are properly interested in the Department of Defense and the steps it is taking to protect the national security. The Department of Defense has an obligation to inform the public within the limitations of security and policy with respect to the Department's activities and to provide the public with accurate factual and other proper information regarding the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.

As examples of how the Department of Defense is meeting this obligation, I believe the committee will be interested in the following figures relative to the furnishing of information to the Congress and to the public. For the 10-month period July 1, 1955, to May 1, 1956, the Department of Defense, including the military services, received approximately 1,000 formal written requests for information from congressional committees. Some of the requested information was readily available, but some of it required weeks, and in some instances even months, to collect, assemble, check, and prepare. During the same period the committees of Congress have held 80 hearings on defense matters which required Defense Department officials to present comprehensive information about defense activities and operations. This compilation does not include several thousand telephone requests for information from the Congress, the public, and the news media, nor the several thousand letters from individual Members of the Congress seeking information for their constituents.

During this same period the Office of Public Information processed 1,100 news releases which originated in the Department of Defense. The Office of Security Review reviewed for security 10,000 items. In addition to the foregoing, 16 news conferences were held by the Secretary of Defense during this time. For day-to-day on-the-spot coverage desk space and facilities are provided in the Pentagon for representatives of the press and radio and TV stations.

The basic problem faced by the Department of Defense, and also the Congress itself, is how to make the maximum information available to the greatest number and categories of persons without, at the same time, either jeopardizing the safety of the Nation, or inequitably benefiting or hurting particular groups or individuals.

It is well recognized that not all information in the possession of the Department of Defense can be made available and that some of such information can only be made available to a limited number of individuals or organizations. Some inhibitions upon full access by all are required in the national interest and are exercised pursuant to statutory and Presidential authority.

With respect to defense information, clearly certain facts as to our plans, operations, and equipment could be of great value to a potential enemy. We must exercise vigilance in handling such information if we are not ourselves to undermine our own defense posture.

We are faced with the fact that never in our history have we had an era quite like this. Always in the past this country was either at peace, with little or no worry about foreign or domestic enemies who might seek to learn our military secrets for the advantage of a hostile power, or the country was in a state of war with obvious danger to the national security. During a period of cold war such as we are now exposed to for the first time, I am certain the Congress will agree that it is extremely important we exercise care in handling information which would be of great value to a potential enemy and might prejudice the defense interests of the United States or our international relations.

With respect to the limitations on access to certain information, there is, unfortunately, no precise formula which can simply be applied to all information items and which will automatically reveal that any particular item is or is not releasable. Basically, it is a problem generally requiring case-by-case handling because the ultimate decision depends upon many factors. For example, the contents of the information, the status of the world-be recipient, the purpose for which the information will be used, time elements involved, and so forth, must all be considered. The possibilities are almost infinite where the same piece of classified information, at the same time, might be fully available to one group, such as the Congress, fully or partially available to another Government agency, not available at all to the public in general, yet partially available to certain scientists or industrial firms.

In view of the absence of a precise formula for testing all information and the many complex and intangible factors involved, it must be noted that, in the last analysis, the exercise of individual judgment is all important. Reasonable and intelligent individuals in full possession of the facts can, and do, honestly differ as to what constitutes proper judgment in a particular situation. Yet, clearly, the individula having the official responsibility for the decision on release, or degree of access, cannot avoid it by sharing it with the would-be recipient.

Sound judgment cannot be legislated or assured by administrative decree. Also, it must be observed that evaluation of particular decisions requiring the exercise of judgment, on limiting access to information, is often rendered difficult, as a practical matter, by the fact that one of the parties-the would-be recipient-in many instances cannot be given all the facts affecting the decision. To do so, as a practical matter, would nullify the decision.

Mr. Chairman, your committee has expressed an interest in Secretary Wilson's classification of General Ridgway's report of June 27, 1955, and in the Department of Defense Directive 5230.9 of March 29, 1955. I would at this time like to discuss these two matters briefly. General Ridgway's letter was an official report to the Secretary of Defense from the retiring Chief of Staff of the Army, expressing his views on the composition of the Army, its role in our defense structure, and its potential effect upon our international relations. With this in mind, Secretary Wilson determined that its publication just prior to the Geneva Conference of July 18 to 23, 1955, might have an adverse effect upon the President's efforts to establish a basis for