Senator HATCH. But you do distinguish that from other connections or appearances before the Government?

Mr. CORCORAN. As I say, I am perfectly willing to talk about Sterling; but I don't want it bracketed in the headlines tonight with other things.

Senator HATCH. Has your practice been extensive, aside from the defense contracts?

Mr. CORCORAN. Fairly so, Senator.

Senator HATCH. As profitable as these have been?

Mr. CORCORAN. I think you are getting to my divorce cases. Senator HATCH. I am speaking of matters connected with Govern

ment.

Mr. CORCORAN. No; not that I know of yet, Senator.

Senator HATCH. I said, had they been as extensive-that is, your appearances in other Government matters-as defense contracts! Have they been as profitable?

Mr. CORCORAN. Outside of the Sterling case, I don't think I have been involved in anything else touching the Government.

Senator HATCH. Now, on the Sterling case, Mr. Chairman, the witness evinced a desire to relate that story to a proper committee or at a proper place where it would not be associated with these defense contracts. I think he should have that privilege. I don't think he ought to go before the Judiciary Committee, though, because there is nothing pending before the Judiciary Committee. The story has been told to this committee, and I think your suggestion that he come back at a later time when it would not be associated with these other matters and let him tell that story would be all right.

The CHAIRMAN. It is perfectly agreeable to me. I just made the suggestion to Senator Hatch that he let you tell that story to the Judiciary Committee.

Mr. CORCORAN. I thought, Senator Hatch, since fundamentally it is a problem of Department of Justice

Senator HATCH (interposing). I know.

Mr. CORCORAN. That probably the Judiciary Committee was the best place to tell it.

Senator HATCH. I think it would be, but Senator Ball and Senator Herring and Senator Mead and Senator Brewster are none of them members of the Judiciary Committee; only Senator Connally and I are. They have heard part of the story, and I think they ought to hear the rest of it.

The CHAIRMAN. We can arrange that. You are perfectly willing to tell it at the proper time; that is the main thing. If you are willing to tell it, we will arrange that some other way.

Are there any other questions, Senator Brewster?

Senator BREWSTER. I want to go for a moment into this broader question of policy that is involved, and propriety. You were the chairman or the executive head of the committee, the political committee, in the last campaign, of Independent Voters?

Mr. CORCORAN. I was one of the executive committee.

Senator BREWSTER. Well, I think you said in this statement that you put in most of your time on that,

Mr. CORCORAN. I did put in all of my time on that for a long time. Senator BREWSTER. And that was entirely analogous to the position of a member of a national committee, would you say?

Mr. CORCORAN. No, Senator.

committee.

This was a temporary political

Senator BREWSTER. Well, during the duration of the campaign you were most active for the election. Would that be a fair statement? Mr. CORCORAN. Certainly. I was very active.

Senator BREWSTER. I simply wanted, as it seemed to me, using the analogy of persons in that position using their influence, to address myself to that to see whether you would distinguish it.

Mr. CORCORAN. Senator, some day you will be as convinced, I am sure, as I am that those working on an independent political committee have no political influence.

Senator BREWSTER. Well, I wouldn't presume to say as to who had the influence in the administration, the regulars or the independents, because that is outside my province, but I think each of you have quite a lot of influence. That is why I wanted to read to you the statement regarding activities of this character. I quote:

I have felt all along that it is not quite in accord with the spirit of the administration that any individual who holds a high party position, such as national committeeman, should earn a livelihood by practicing law, because, in a sense, he holds himself out as having access to the back door of the administration. It just "is not done."

Do you find yourself in accord with that statement?

Mr. CORCORAN. As I remember it, isn't that the letter that was written about Mr. Arthur Mullen?

Senator BREWSTER. That is quoted from the public papers and addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Mr. CORCORAN. Well, I agree with anything that Franklin D. Roosevelt says.

Senator BREWSTER. Do you have to see his signature before you conclude your ideas?

Senator CONNALLY. I think it ought to be noted that the Senator from Maine has at least approved of something by President Roosevelt. Senator BREWSTER. I find that Mr. Corcoran wouldn't approve it until he knew who said it. I go on and read a further quotation.

Referring to Mr. Mullen's retirement-as you recall, Mr. Robert Jackson, Mr. Arthur Mullen, Mr. Bruce Kremer were all retired from political position because of their activity in law practice in Washington, and I quote again from the letter of the President of the United States acknowledging Mr. Mullen's letter to him:

I can appreciate your feeling as indicated in your letter to me, that the time has come when you feel you should resign as national committeeman.

That is the end of the quotation. The President did not disagree with that conclusion. But he goes on to say-I quote:

I shall welcome a continuation of your counsel and advice where the welfare of your State and the country is concerned.

It is phrased with a felicity that we find characteristic of his utterances during your association. I take it you would agree with that statement also.

Mr. CORCORAN. As I understand it, the idea was that Mr. Mullen shouldn't continue as the national committeeman while he was in private practice. This committee of mine was disbanded and its affairs cleared up before I went into private practice, so I am exactly, if the analogy holds at all, in the position of Mr. Mullen after he resigned.

Senator BREWSTER. You have divested yourself of your political inhibition.

Mr. CORCORAN. I divested myself of my political activity.

Senator BREWSTER. Yes. Now, I go on quoting again. This is from Mr. Mullen's book on the Western Democrat, which may be of interest to our Texas Senator.

Senator James F. Byrnes, of South Carolina, went on the radio with a speech of protest against allowing any members of the national committee to maintain law offices in Washington. He also introduced in the Senate a bill to that effect. Jim Farley came to me with the statement that he thought I ought to resign from the committee.

"Did the President send you?", I asked him.

"No; not exactly," he said, "but I think he wants you to resign."

I said, "I won't stir a step unless he himself asks me."

I continue the quotation:

He said that nothing had happened to change his mind, but, as he went on, I realized (this is the President of the United States talking to Mr. Mullen) that the men who wanted to get me out of Washington law practice had put him on a hot spot and that he was appealing to my friendship for him. If the situation was bad for me it was also bad for him-and he was the chief of my party and the President of the United States.

Now, whether or not the distinction which you draw between active association with a political party or political activity or previous association with the Government and the action which you took in resigning your position and association with the Government completely bridges the gulf or whether the 2 years of quarantine enforced by most of the departments of long standing, that is, if they have a rule, I take it is the question here. What is your view, Mr. Corcoran ?

Mr. CORCORAN. I think, again, that the problem is what the end result is, whether anything that has been done has sold the Government down the river, whether anything that has been done has hurt the Government or helped the Government.

Senator CONNALLY. What was this committee that Senator Brewster asked you about, some committee?

Mr. CORCORAN. It was an independent committee during the last campaign.

Senator CONNALLY. During the last campaign? And you were in the Government service at that time?

Mr. CORCORAN. Oh, no; I had resigned from the Government service in order to be a member of it.

Senator CONNALLY. Do you think it is any harm when the opposite to which Senator Brewster belongs, has a capable corps of high-powered senators out on the stump speaking for that party, and that party comes along and kidnaps one of our Democrats and makes him candidate for President of the United States, for the Democrats to do a little to try to maintain their side of it? Do you think there is anything wrong with that?

Mr. CORCORAN. Senator, I am sure everybody knows what I think. Senator CONNALLY. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions, gentlemen? Thank you, Mr. Corcoran. The committee will recess until 10:30 tomorrow morning, when Mr. West will be the witness, and at a future date we will expect you to appear, Mr. Corcoran.

(Whereupon, at 4:30 p. m. the committee recessed until 10:30 a. m. Wednesday, December 17, 1941.)

INVESTIGATION OF NATIONAL DEFENSE PROGRAM

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1941

UNITED STATES SENATE,

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE
THE NATIONAL DEFENSE PROGRAM,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met at 10:41 a. m., pursuant to adjournment on Tuesday, December 16, 1941, in room 318, Senate Office Building, Senator Harry S. Truman, presiding.

Present: Senators Harry S. Truman (chairman), Tom Connally, Harley M. Kilgore, Ralph O. Brewster, James M. Mead, and Clyde L. Herring.

Also present: Mr. Hugh A. Fulton, chief counsel; Mr. Charles P. Clark, associate chief counsel.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. Mr. West, will you take that seat, please, and be sworn?

Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, in the testimony you are about to give before this committee, so help you God?

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES WEST, CHEVY CHASE, MD.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. West, are you a lawyer?

Mr. WEST. No; I am not, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You were a Congressman from Ohio?

Mr. WEST. Yes; I was, for two terms.

The CHAIRMAN. And Under Secretary of the Interior?

Mr. WEST. Yes, sir.

CONNECTIONS OF CHARLES WEST WITH EMPIRE ORDNANCE CO. AND

FRANK COHEN

The CHAIRMAN. Are you connected with the Empire Ordnance? Mr. WEST. At this time, no.

The CHAIRMAN. You have been?

Mr. WEST. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, what was the nature of that connection, Mr. West?

Mr. WEST. The Empire Ordnance Co., through Mr. Frank Cohen, who was associated at that time with a group of people from New York and Ohio, came to me some time during the latter part of October or November of last year, during the campaign, and asked me if I would be interested in helping them in connection with various matters that they had then and felt that they would have

that would require the advice and counsel of someone that knew Washington and knew the Government, and after several conversations an arrangement was worked out whereby I was to be associated with them, not as an official of the company nor as a holder of stock, but to be associated with them on a basis of compensation representing a percentage of their business.

The CHAIRMAN. You were not on a salary?

Mr. WEST. No; I was not; but it was understood that I was employed by them on the basis of this compensation.

The CHAIRMAN. What was the purpose of that employment; just the nature of the employment? What were you supposed to do? Mr. WEST. The purpose of that was to aid them in their work. None of them was familiar with Washington nor with the various procedures of the Government, and I was engaged as an adviser and a consultant to help them in matters pertaining to their work and matters that they expected to have that would involve work in Washington. It was supposed to cover the whole range of their activities. It wasn't for any purpose of securing contracts for them, because at that time, when I first became associated with Mr. Cohen and the Empire Ordnance, there were commitments from the British Purchasing Commission with respect to British business. At no time was there any question of a contract with the United States Government involved. It was British business to be carried out by the Empire Ordnance for the British Government and to be paid for out of British funds several months prior to the arrangements made under the lend-lease program.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, in order that the British contract would be carried out, it had to be approved by the United States Ordnance Department, did it not?

Mr. WEST. Yes; there had to be approval or clearance from the War Department, from the Ordnance Division of the War Department, before the British Government would negotiate a contract. The CHAIRMAN. And Mr. Cohen was having some difficulty getting that clearance, wasn't he?

Mr. WEST. Yes. During the campaign, during October-
The CHAIRMAN (interposing). This is in 1940?

Mr. WEST. In 1940, I was told by a mutual friend that Mr. Cohen was having difficulty in a matter in Washington. At that time I knew nothing at all about his company or his program. Of course, over the last 10 years as a Member of Congress and as a member of the administration I have done a good many favors for people of all sorts, as you gentlemen no doubt have.

Senator CONNALLY. And some disfavors to some of them.

Mr. WEST. I presume so, Senator. In fact, some have been interpreted that way in my case, and a political friend of mine from Ohio came to me and represented this problem as being a matter involving a friend or client of his and wanted this favor done. Of course, I was very busy during the campaign, I was out speaking practically

Senator BREWSTER (interposing). Who was this gentleman friend? Mr. WEST. A gentleman by the name of Duffy, Mr. Dan Duffy, of Cleveland, Ohio, whom I had known for a number of years politically in Ohio, and I was importuned to come to Washington and to see if anything could be done to help Empire Ordnance, and I did that.