EMPLOYMENT OF RETIRED MILITARY AND CIVILIAN
BY DEFENSE INDUSTRIES

THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1959

HOUSE or REPRESENTATIVES,
Comma 0N ARMED SEEVIOEs,
SUBOOMMIELTEE FOR SPECIAL 
Washington, 12.0.

The subcommittee met at 10am, the Honorable F. Edward Hebert
(ghajrman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. HEBERT. The commitee will be in order.

Members of the committee, this mornin we will continue with our
ea?eague, Mr. Santangelo, from New Yor who is available now for

sectioning on his statement.

The Chair also wishes to announce that following Mr. Santangelo
we will hear Mr. Stratton. We will continue with the Members of
Congress until 11 o?clock, at which time we will suspend if they are
still on the stand and hear Admiral Rickover, who is scheduled to be
here at 11 o?clock.

Admiral Redford is due here, if possible, at that time. He is at-
tending a Security Council meeting .with the President at the White
House at this moment. I assured him yesterday, in talking with him,
that he should continue his meetin there and come here as quickly
as he could. In the event he is una Is to get here before our compul-
sory adjournment, he will be the ?rst witness, and only witness,
tomorrow morning at 10 o?clock. We will hear from Admiral. Rad-
ford tomorrow if he does not arrive today. But we will de?nitely
hear from Admiral Rickover at 11 o?clock.

Mr. Santangelo, you completed your statement?

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes, Sir. 

Mr. Under our procedure-Mr. Courtney, our counsel, ques-
tions and then the members of the committee ask you questions.

Mr. Courtney.

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Santangelo, if I may refer to page 2 of your
statement, the next-to-the?last paragraph, you make this statement:

It is said by others that such military?

?rst, you state:

It is said that the Pentagon in?uence cannot be proven because procurement
Of?cers will not speak for fear of destroying their future advancement. It is
said by others that such military in?uence is minimal.

Now, of course, the committee must deal in speci?cs. Whom do you
say has, mdicated that Pentagon 1n?uence cannot be proven or that it

ex1sts 
77

44112??59??6

 

 

 

 

 

  
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
   
 
 
   
    
 
 
 
 
  
 
   
  
   
  
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
   
 
   
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
  
 
  
   
  
 

 

 

78 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

Mr. SANTANGELO. Well, I spoke to several colonels whose names 3
wouldn?t care to divulge, and they asked me?they didn?t Want to 
involved.

Mr. COURTNEY. In what service?

Mr. SANTANGELO. A colonel. He is in the negotiations ?eld.

COURTNEY. Was this Arm or Air Force, Mr. 'Santangelqg

Mr. SANTANGELO. Frankly, I ave never speci?cally asked, but. .
believe he is with the Amy.

I was trying to ?nd out from him whether I could get some pm;
curement o?icers?negotiators to testify, and also?what was his Bi?
perience in the ?eld. His reaction" was that even though they wishei
to tell the story, that if they did they would b?lpersona non grata an,?
that any future advancement in the service we be destroyed becau?.?
their testimony would not be forgotten. That is a basis upon which I
made 111 statement. 

Mr. URTNEY. Now, then, did you talk to others who said that thy}
in?uence, as you say, was minimal? ?It is said by'others that eta.
military in?uence is minimal.? The subcommittee would be inter.
ested in speci?cs. 

Mr.- Samancnno. Yes. I received a letter or two 
the services, which I can submit to you?because they mentioned th??i?
name: and they didn?t ask me to withhold their names, so I could 811i]!
mit their letters to you. And in reading over the testimony pf,
Admiral Radford, on the television program, it spelled out an infuse
cues that if there was in?uence it was minimal. 1
- That is the inference .I drew from the testimony of Admiral Rant
ford on the ?Face the Nation,? on the CBS Television --: 
- As a matter?of fact, you gentlenmn have requested Admiral Rad-2
fold to appear, so you can ask him that question. . 

Mr. COURTNEY. Yes, that will be undertaken, Mr. Santangelo.

Well, now, what are we to understand in these circumstances "toil-If
your conclusion as to whether this in?uence is present and forcefuh.
orminimal it What is our conclusion? 
. Mr. SANTANGEID.. I ink it is extensive. It is a feeling I have, and?
I base it, (1) on the extent of the excessive pro?ts in ren - tiation.

Mr. COURTNEY. Do you have anythin which indicates resenga
or in?uence or activities of any reti o?icer persOnnel which 16%?
to the ro?ts which were subsequently recouped in renegotiation?

Mr. I stated, sir, in my original- remarks, that I ha!
no de?nite information as to a speci?c case of in?uence. - 

I made that clear. I was not accusing any c?icer or admml
or any other member of-the service with a c.case-, becauseil
didn?t know of an speci?c instance. But I di feel from the overs-ll
situation?and, 0 con as a lawyer I know. sometimes we . can?t
prove a case. That is reason I requested an investigation'ha
undertaken. Actually I didn?t request it. I introduced an amend-
ment which carried out my thought, that would bar defense .con -:
tractors, and as a result I think the committee indicated it would
pursue the subject. - 

Now, I would also state?I read the operations re 
of 1956 on jet aircraft. I am not criticizing the committee. 
were at close hand. While they indicated that they couldn?t chargin;
any particular people with wrongdoing, they recommendedthat thug

  
 
 
    
 
  

 

 EL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

1, I spoke to several colonels, whose names 3!
and they asked me?they didn?t want to hi.

at service?

olonel. He is in the negotiations ?eld.

his Army or Air Force, Mr. 'Santan 10;?
nkly, I have never Speci?cally asked?emt I

1 .
Iii: from him whether I could get some pro.
store to teetify, and also?what was his ex;
is reaction was that even though they wished
hey did they would be persona non grata and
1ent in the service would be destroyed because
be forgotten. That is a basis upon whichI

hen, did you talk to others who saidthatthin
5 minimal? ?It is said by'others that such-
iimal.? The subcommittee would be inter:

I received a letter or two from. menibersoi.

submit to you?because they mentioned their

me to withhold their names, so I cOuld suba.

And in reading over the testimony of;

a television program, ?it spelled out an infer-i

ience it was minimal.

I drew from the testimony of Admiral Rad-

.tion,? on the CBS Television Network. .-

cu gentlenmn have requested Admiral Rad.
ask him that question.

at will be undertaken, Mr. Santangelo.

to understand in these circumstances tobe:

ether this in?uence is present and forceft?.

urconclusion? 

nkit- is extensive. It is a feeling I have, and,

it of the excessive pro?ts inren tiationa

. have anythin which indicates rescues
of any reti o?cer personnel which led'
a subsequently recouped in renegotiation? 

ted, sir, in my original remarks, that I had-

3 to a speci?c case of in?uence. .

r. I was not accusing any o?icer or admiral.
the service with a ei?cease, because}

is instance. But I di feel from the overs};

s, as a lawyer I know sometimes we can-?1-
he reason I requested an' investigation bqi'
didn?t request it. I introduced an am 
my thought, that would bar defense con"-
I think the committee indicated "it" would?

read the Government operations raged
I am not criticizing the committee.? - '03?
1e they indicated that they couldn?t char -
wrongdoing, they recommendedithat -

 

RETIRED IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY 79

retired military 1.11311 being aged defense contractors
gemi?lgldointo and certain action takeieingy the efense Department.
That was in 1956.

TNEY. A without speci?cs? .. 
3%31, I would have come to a different conclu-

res ect to one articular case that the seemed be have white-
mm? gPiven I would have wn a di?erent con-
elusion based on the facts as I read them in the record. However, they
bed-their own 0 inion. I don?t particularl care to Specify a par-
.?enler oi?cer an isolate him from everyone .

The record is available to your committee With res to those
hearings, and you can pick out the name yourselves. is not my
desire to smear anybody, without de?mte proof. My whole being has
been to rotect peo 1e from unjust criticism and unjust smears.

Mr. Well, now, in the circumstances, and on the informa-
tion which you have given the subcommittee, would you think it would
be, proper for the Congress to undertake action in either direction on
the sus icions which on have indicated in your statement? . .

Mr.? ANTANGELO. o. I would try to pursue it and see if I could

it. 
P?o?ld suggest tt' . the ?les of all the procurement Of?cers?
the [negotiators?an? ask em in executiye session what their training
was, With an assurance to them that their testimony wouldn?t be dis-
closed to their superiors, and we" could see if we could get the truth.

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, is it our opinion that the things of which you
spoke, and which you fear, re ates to the procurement process? . 

Mr.- SANTANGEEO. I think de?nitely?in the procurement of military
equipment, aircraft, and in the personalities of high-rankm of?cers
upon their former subordinate. . I ?also have been advmed some
pee Is that the defense contractor is badgered and annoyed by some
oftiie fellows working with the services who are trying to get Jobs from
them They seem to wish these men would get off their backs, and
they dOn?t want to be annoyed so much. That reverses the Situation,
where the people in the services are badgermg the defense contractors
{Oi-employment. - . ..- . 

Mr. COURTNEY. Yes. Now, do you have any instances in mind?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I do not. . . .

Mr. COURTNEY. Would you mind telli the committee the source
of the information upon which your cone usion hasbeen. ressed!

Mr. SANTANGELO. I would hate to use the expressmn ~?dec me.? 
would like to protect the source because it was on the basis that it
would be kept con?dential that I obtained it. 

Mr. Shall we put it this way: ?Was it one or more per-
sons?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I think I heard in two instances.

Mr. COURTNEY. And what would you say was the rank of the per-
son? Was it of general o?cer grade or above, or was it someone in the
lower echelon?

Mr. SANTANGELO. I think it was general of?cer.

Mr. COURTNEY. And?? 

Mr. There was one general of?cer and one outs1de of
the service.

 

?v 



i.



 

   
 
 
  
  
   
 
 
 
  
 
 
   
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
    
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
   
  
  
 
   
  
 
  
 
 
 

 

80 RETIRED PERSONNEL 1N DEFENSE INDUSTRY

tim 9' COURTNEY. Were those of?cers on active duty at the present



Mr. SANTANGELO. I believe the general of?cer was.
. COURTNEY. On active duty?

Mr. SANTANGELO. That is right.
Mr. COURTNEY. Was his ass1gnn1ent in the service in connection with
rocurement activity of the service? 
ME. SANTANOELO. 0, he was not. He wasn?t connected w1th pm
curement.?

Mr. COURTNEY. He was in some other branch of the service. Was
he in acombat branch? - 

r. SANTANGELO. No??not presently. He may have been at some.
time. I didn?t go into his previous experience and history.

Mr. COURTNEY. Now, with reference to your assertion that there is
an extensive hiring of retired military personnel, are you directing?
your attention or your conclusions in the statement to the defense in}.
dustries who have been carried on the list of the 100 largest eon-
tractors? 

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes.- I requested of the Defense De artment 
list of the names of the 100 defense contractors, to o, with names Of
the oii'lcers who were eniployed. They also used list 'which I sub;
mitted, and also the list which Senator Douglas submitted, and in
sorted 1n the Congressional Record.= -

founded?
Mr. SANTANGELO. That is correct.
Mr COURTNEY. Now, I notice you state over here on pa 4, Mr

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, that is the list upon which your statement is

Santahgelo, after having cited the statutes?and we are al. familiar -
with theme?that ?the enforcement of statutes or regulations leaves 


much to be desired.? Now, what speci?cally do yo ave in mind.
Mr. SANTANOELO. Well, there has been in my opinion a lack of on:

Mr. Steele in the newspaper. .

Mr. COURTNEY. That is what has been called the case.
This was a decision by the Comptroller General in anuary of this
year. .

Mr. SANTANOELO. That is correct.

Mr. COURTNEY. And that is the one you have in mind?

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes. And, of course, I wasn?t aware until yes?
terday when SenatOr avits pointed out, I think, three or ?ve other 
stances where prosecutions took place. I think there has been a lack"?
of enforcement of the statute. No cases came to my attention. Per;-
haps one inference would he that there was no violation, or the second
would he that there was no. enforcement of it. .

Mr. COURTNEY. You are drawing an inference from the lack of pros-
ecutions, successful ros'ecutions and convictions, that the situation
is not as good as it should" be? 

In other words, you think human nature is more corrupt than the
statistics prove; is that it? . 

Mr. SANTANGELO. Having beena prosecutor, I know certain statutes
are not paid attention to until BOMB public attention is brought to
the situation. 

 

Al
the 
installs

Mr. 
3,3 3 
rises?


its
grim

53110131?
necessa
Mr.- 
or that

Mrs!
M114
under 
Mr. 
Mr.-
P?l?lgl?
Anne?.

 

an IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY
O?cers on active duty at the present
is general of?cer was.

:37

ht.

went in the service in connection with
a service? 

3 not. He wasn?t connected with pro?

:me- other branch of the service." Was

wresently. He may have been at some
ious experience and history.

afermce to your assertion that there is
military personnel, are you directing
ens in thestatemen?t to the defense in-
on the list of the 100 largest cona

quested of the Defense Department a

me contractors, to go with the names of
They also used the list which I sub-'

1 1Senator Douglas submitted, and int

. 

the list upon which your statement is

root.

as you state over here on pa 4, Mr.
the statutes?and we are a familiar
cent of statutes or regulations leaves
.at speci?cally do you have in mind.
ahas been in my inion a lack of 811*.
garticular case,_wh1_ch was set forth by

Ll) has been called the Anthony cage.
mptroller General in January of this

set. .

LB one you have in mind i

l, of course, I wasn?t aware until yes-

1ted out, I think, three or ?ve other in-

lace. I think there has been a lack
0 cases came to my attention. Pen

Lt there was no violation, or the second

orcement Of it. .

'ing an inference from the lack of pros-

b8 ?and convictions, that the situation

.
[man nature is more corrupt than the

:n a prosecutor, I know certain statutes
some public attention is 'brsught to

 

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY 81

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, of course, in this case?~we are referring to
the Anthony case?we must keep in mind we are not deahng in this
same with the penal statute. 

Mr- SANTANGELO. Well, I have not recommended penal sanctlons.
as a matter of fact, Ithink that this is not a questlon Of penal sanc-
tions. There may not be any criminal activity on the part of the
fatircd . . . .

I say it is a eltuation, a relat1ondh1p or rapport, between the former
retired of?cers and those in the sex-Vice, wh1ch may not amount to any
criminal activity. I have not recommended in my b1ll any criminal
sanctions, as do the other people. I think crnninal sanctions are not
necessary- You have your statutes in. the book. If there is _a crook,
he 0311.139 prosecuted. But I think this goes beyond this's1tuation.

Mr. COURTNEY. Then, yOu are yourself to the statutes
orthe regulations which deal with the suspension of pay, for example?

MLSANTANGELO. Well, that is not a criminal sanction. 

Mr. Com?. No. 

Mr. SANTANGELO. This is a civil penalty.

That is right.? And the Anthony cases was one such
under a Navy statute._ -

Mr. SANTANGELO. That is correct.

Mr. COURTNEY. Now, you state in the concluding sentence Of this
paragraph, that?

mentions people have Written to me that" military people have obtained con-

eeas'ions for certain companies in the 23?s.

Mr. Yes.

Mr. Can you be speci?c? 

Mr. SANTANGELO. I received as a result of some Of the publicity a
couple of letters by peeple in which they speci?cally ointed out the
sLtuations in the several-PX?s?the several. places like ort Myer and
Fort Lee and Fort McNair. 

Mr. COURTNEY. Yes, you say Fort Myer and Fort McNair in your
statement. . -

Mr. SANTANGELO. And the letter-wasunsigned. .

Now, I didn?t want to state which company. I thought it was an
unevaluated statement.

I wouldn?t Want to draw any conclusion. I communicated with
these locations and asked them to submit to me the list of watches
which were being sold, so that I could draw my own conclusions.

Mr. OURTNEY. Now, have you received your answers 3

Yes; I received an answer from Fort Myer only
this morning. And I could submit that for the record.

Mr. COURTNEY. Very well. Why don?t??

Mr. HEBERT. Read it out.

Mr. COURTNEY. Would you like to read it in the record, please?

Mr. SANTANGELO. It is dated July 7.

ME. SANTANGELO: A: per phone conversation with your of?ce this after-
noon, attached is the information regarding watches sold in our post exchange
which you requested in your telegram.

This is from the O?ice of the Commanding Of?cer, Fort Myer, Arling-
ton, Va. It is signed L. Davis, Colonel, Artillery, Commanding.?

 

 

 

 

  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
   
   
  
    
   
   
  
 
 
     
   
   
   
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
   
  
 
 
  
 

82

Infermation reads as follows:

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE . INDUSTRY

(1 With reference to your inquiry or this date concerning watches pres?n?y .

stocked and sold by the exchange, the following information is furnished: -

Bern-us, ladies? and men?s, retail from $20 to $50. 

Bulova, ladies? and men?s, retail from $20 to $50.

(0) Timex, ladies? and men's, retail from $6.50, $9.50, $11 to $12.50.

Timex, children?s, retail $5 and $5.25.

(6) Watches on order from West Coast Swiss Watch 00., men's and women?s,
retail, $6.75. - 

- - .- JOSEPH 8mm. -
General Manager, Acting 033m.

Mr. COURTNEY. New, was that letter responsive to your'inquiryt

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes, it was. - - 

The question I posed to them was??not specifying any particular

company. I asked them the question ?Give ?me the list of typ?s?of
watches that you are selling at the price, and
whether it is for men or 'women.- - I Wasn?t seeking to prove a- par-
ticular point. I was seeking the information, and I elicited this
information.? - -- . -
Mr. New, having gotten that information, what is year
conclusion as to whether anyone has obtained special concessions'for
certain companies in the . - 

"Well, I wO'uldn?t draw a valid conclusion except
to say that these watches are being sold at the exchan There are
other, . cs?kinlds of watches which are less costly. ome are more
costly. hey are not being sold there. I don?t know the practice. a,

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, are you satis?ed or dissatis?ed as to whether
or not there is anyone having a. concession, if you please, an exclusive
omniscient, . ..

Mr. SANTANGEID. There is not an exclusive concession. But there
is a concession to the eople- of these three companies. 

Mr. COURTNEY. ell, of Course the PX is a self-supporting institu;
tion, as you know. Would thefact of the inability to market certain
brands hays anythin to do with their being stocked? Wouldn?tthat
be a matter of mer andising? .

Mr. Well, that is a fact to be determined. -

I personally think I use a Longine. I know other people like some

Swiss. watches. Some people like more valuable watches. .
Mr. May I interrupt there, Mr. Santangelo? For "the rec?
ord the prices of watches in the Post Exchange has been a subject
for this committee for many years, not only watches but 
and a price agreement was reached with this committee as to the
maximum and minimum price of a watch, that is the amount of money
that can be char ed for a watch. .

You mentions Longine, which is a very expensive watch. I just.
wanted to point that up. Probably you weren?t aware of that. -
anr. SANTANGELO. I wasn?t aware of that, but it is a good point to

ow.

Mr. Paras. Mr. Chairman, I think
that we don?t set the price of the watch.

Mr. COURTNEY. We set the maximum price. 

Mr. The maximum price. The cost range of watches.

Mr. COURTNEY. Yes.

you ought to clarify the fact

.10
igcked. in the

 

 

 



1V6 have the reel
.of the full con
:ghO conducted
time that it is 
I15 the general 

ars ago n(
the armed

With .referen

upon the seller
{,0qu not mi:
in the axe

There is a 311;

the cost of _liv.

remains the co:
Mr. 
thereis, in agl
inanexc an
Since the?
with approprl;
might to stock
"increase the nu
Mr. 
- to 
irdon?tgeknowi 
to take these. 
question. - I 
exchange. .11
asked some Jev
basis of the i1
anyone is bein
Mr. 
types Of watcl
or not there IE
to the facts w}
Mr. 
ment that the:
to any other
Mr. 
an 1 to 
196%ng which 
have in your:
Mr. 
general mana

 

 

ERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

follows 

ur inquiry of this date concerning watches presently
mange, the following information is furnished 

fan?s, retail from $20 to $50. 
en?s, retail from $20 to $50.

en?s, retail from $6.50, $9.50, $11 to. $12.50.
ail $5 and $5.25. 

West Coast Swiss Watch 00., men's and women's,

. - -- JosnrH SPELLMAN,

General Manager, Acting 03309::
was that letter responsive to your-inquiry!
it W33. .
to them was?not Specifying any particular
1 the question ?Give -me the list of typeset
alling at the list price, :?and
women.- I wasn?t seeking to prove par-
:eking the information, and I elicited this?

raving gotten that information, what is yOu'r
anyone has obtained special concessions-far
- .- -
I wouldn?t draw a valid conclusion except
are being sold at the excha There are
toheswhich are less costly. - cm are more
Iig sold there. . I don?t know the practice;
.re you satis?ed or dissatis?ed as to whether
ring aconcession, if you please, an exclusive
.e of these thre

But there
companies. 
course the PX is a. self-supporting institu?
the fact of the inability to market certain
{oowit?h their being stocked? Wouldn?t that
that is a fact to be determined.
- a Longine. lmow other people like some
)ple like more .valuable watches. .
:rrupt there, Mr. Santan lo? For the rec:
in the Post Exchange as been a sub'ect
ny years, not only watches but 
as reached with this committee as to the
vice of a watch, that is the amount of money
watch. 
., which is a very expensive watch. I just
Probably you weren?t aware of that. 7 
1?t aware of that, but it is a good point to

is not an exclusive con'cessiOn.

in I think you ought to clarify the fact
ft watch. 

as maximum price. 

on price. The cost range of watches.

 

 

PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE nanusrnr 83

Planner?" . I think it would be proper at this time, in order that
lliilaive the record absolume clear on it?Mr. Smart, the chief counsei
wife the full is present. And Mr. Smart was the 0011:3112?
oho conducted the inquiry into the post exchanges. I think at 1s
v! that it is appropriate, for the record, Mr. Smart, that you1 lg??
Esmthe general resume of it so we will know exactly what we are ta ng
Show um ch in 1949 just
With 3 eel?c reference towat 
omya'ms ago 51;? lilie agreegient was reached between. t, lscommitt?e
?nd the armed services on many items, practically all items to 
. Chan . wg?h there was a cost limitation of $35 Idllaced
on the general category watches. That means that the jEerie anage
33nd net pay more than $35 for any watch which, 1t stocked or res 
milligrglis a 511531; escalator clause tied to that which takeismtoacc?iun:
the cost of livnig, rise or fall, and the index. But su tgnu? 1
remains the cost of'$35 On al?rwastches, Without regard to ran .
Hanna-ll: ydu understand now, Mr. Santangelo, tl?dt
there'i's an agreement as to the extent osiimerchandismg perm1ssi: 
I letme backtomyquehon. .- -. 
magc?gg??s ?musgqbe 'self-supporting?they are not supported
with appropriated say that an exchange gr
ought to stock merchandise whic he felt was unsalable, mercy 
increase the number of watches he carriedmhis case? .3 ts: You

Mr. SANTANGELO. I think the sales problem has two as so . 
tryto get the cheapest watch and get that wh1ch sells the 3:1,
I don?t know what the demand fer any watch was before they cor . 
to take these'watches into the post exchange. -I couldn a?sv?lriyout
question. - I think it is a quest1on that has to be answered Io lpos?
eichange. I know that there are cheaper watches than these. av
asked. some jewelry pee 1e, before I exp cred this. 11 the

Mr. COURTNEY. We -, what is your conclusmn now, ?ndh y, on. at
heels Of the information which you gathered, asto wheP?r or T69
anyone is being favored in the ?purchasmg of watches for ref?r 

Mr. SANTANGELO. A111 can state 1s the fact that there are. ee
types Of watches which are being sold to the exclusion of other: ?11

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, do you have any conclusmns as to e1 or
or not there is improper in?uence or any opercmn of any kind leatdng
to the facts which you have found, and which you accept as .te?

Mr. I wouldn?t make that statement, except a .
ment that there are three watches which are bemg sold. 1n pre erence

atches. . 
Now, Mr. Santangelo, you have indicated you would
Suppl to the committee the several documents to you 1111a]? re-
ferre which were the basis of some'of the other statements 10 you
ared statement.

{fl-.1 nSigl'i?E?o. Speci?cally, I referred to the report from the

general manager Of the post exchange3.5-2, . L. 5.. -

 

 

 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

.RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

   

Mr. COURTNEY. I think you had some letters which you said refers. ..
to military in?uence as minimal.
Mr. SANTANGELO. No, I didn?t say that. - I
Mr. HEBERT. Before we leave the watch incident??
Mr. SANTANGELO. Oh, yes, that I will submit to you yes. 
(The letters referred to follow 

Hon. Arman E. Smrmenrn,
Member of Congress, House Of?ce Building,


MY DEAR Commons: IThanh: you for your letter of July 27, 1959, enclosing,
exchange of correspondence between the commanding of?cers at Forts Mela?
and Meyer and the'Waiter Reed Medical Center concerning the sale of watc?q
to which you made reference in your testimony before the subcommittee. 

. I shall haye'your observations included in the record of this proceeding at 1"
appropriate place. - - - - -.

Your cooperation with the subcommittee in maldng this information availab? .
together with your? conclusions thereon, is appreciated. .

Sincerely yours,
- F. Enw..H1tmar, Chairman. 

MONDAY, Aneusr 3, 1959.

 

 

Confesses or run Ums?n 
House or 
19.0., July 27, 1359. 

  
 
 
 
   
  
     
 
  
   
 
  
   
   
   
 
   
 

Hon. F. Enwann Banner, .

Chem Special Investigations Subcommittee of Anned Earpiece omen?,

- . 
Ms. CHAIRMAN: I am forwarding herewith the letter which I recei: 

from Col. George 0. Duehring, commanding of?cer, Fort Lesley J. McNair, reg - Hone-
ing the types of watches which are being sold at the post exchange th?: Hang
together with the list of watches being sold at the Walter Reed Medical Genter? DEB
- You will note by comparing. these lists with the list of watches sold at - is, Q:
Myer, which I also enclose, that there is a greater range and lower pricesri - eschew
watches at Fort McNair than at Fort Myer. In my,testim0uy, I pointed ?d 
that I had received an anonymous letter indicating that there was milita Emilie.
in?uence in the procurement of watches at Fort Myer. That post exchaii..: 
sells only 4 types, whereas Fort McNair sells 10, whose prices are within .1: g?
acceptable price range and in some instances, are lower than those at Myi- 1' mail
Walter Reed Medical Center sells 11. it

As you recall, counsel asked me if, on the basis of the information I had received
from Fort Myer, I still believed there was' in?uence in the procurement-.4
watches. I replied that on the basis of the testimony before me, all 1 0011i! 
state was that it appears that these companies had concessions, but I couid?
make no statement as to in?uence. Committee members then sought to point.-



g!
asses

 

out that the ?fair trade? laws perhaps prohibited the extensive sale of variott; 33
types of watches. It would seem to me that the practice at Fort McNair- anti.l 3:
Walter Reed, where 10 and 11 types of watches are sold, would contradict the? Benn
attempted assertion of a possible prohibition. In
I would appreciate your incorporating the foregoing statement and enclosed. hr
letters as part of the record131310.11
Sincerely, I
ALFRED E. Sam-menu), . 3

Master of Congress. This??

1 ms

?Hedi;

Omen or run Connemara (lemons, Innis

Four LEBLEY J. MONAIB, Helm

Washington, D.0., July 8, 1959.
Hon. Animus E. Sanrauemo,
House of Representatives, Washington, 0.0. 
Dear Ms. Seurauenm: Receipt is acknowledged of your telegram of July er:
concerning the types of watches which are being sold in the post exchange.

 

 TEN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

I you had some letters which you said referral,
n1ni1nal. 
I didn?t say that.

re leave the watch inci dent??

yes, that I will submit to you yes.

:0 follow .
MONDAY, Aususr 3, 1959.

3:
0,6503 Building,

i1]: you for your letter of July 27, 1959, enclosing an:

between the commanding of?cers at Forts McNajil

teed Medical Center concerning the sale of watch?

in your testimony before the subcommittee. 

ions included in the record of this proceeding at 
If

subcommittee in making this information availabiq
.ons thereon, is appreciated.

F. Ebw. . Harmer, Chem

 

Genoa-ass or ran Unrrnu sums, .
House or Rmsnurams,
Washington, 11.0., July 27, 1.959,

atom 50050955571555 of Am seesaw calamities,-

forwarding hereWith the letter which I receit It!
commanding of?cer, Fort Lesley J. McNair, rega? 
vhich are being sold at the post exchange theril.?
:ches being sold at the Walter Reed Medical Gents!
ag these lists with the list of watches sold at Fe 
that there is a greater range and lower prihes? I
an at Fort Myer. In my testimony, I pointed'dsj 
)nymo'u's letter indicating that there was military;
11: of watches at Fort Myer. That post ex 
Fort McNair sells 10, whose prices are within 
in some instances, are lower than those at '5
sells 11the basis of the information I had receiy
iieved there in the procurements; 
the basis of the testimony before me, all I so
hat these companies had concessions, but, I ..
?uence. Committee members then sought to point
as perhaps prohibited the extensive sale oi! vario'il?
seem to me that the practice at Fort McNair' ahdz?
11 types of watches are sold, would contradict 
nssible prohibition.
ncorporating the foregoing statement and enclosed"
if it is not too late. 

Arman E. Shuranoum,
Member of Congress.

 
 
  
  
 
    
  
   
 

 

Osman or THE Communism 0113110153,
Fen-r Luster J. 35on
Washington, 13.0., July 8, 1959.

immersion. 1.3.0. 
eceipt is acknowledged of your telegram of July ii
.tches which are being sold in the post exchangi-

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN INDUSTRY

85

flu! following type waf?es with selling price indicated are sold in the post

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

exchange.
orte:
Women?s $13.75.
Men?s ?gg?and $13.75.
- - ark: . .
15.535: Men?s $6.50 and $9.50.
er.
Hm?a 365565 $9.50.
men?? . .
Rang? Men's $13.25 -
max: Men?s $7.25 and $12.50.
Hamilton:
Men?s . $49.25.
Women?sl $37 and $50.75.
B?oi?iaeil?n $20.50, $23.75, $32.50, $40.50, and $24.
Women?s $21.50, $25, $27, $24.50, $29.50, and $28.75.
'Z?ifeh?n $28.75, $40.25, $50.75, $52.50, and $54.
Women?s $34.75 and $52.50.
Ben iden'? $23.75,- 27, $27.75, $30.50, and $33.50.
Women?s $23, $27, $33.50.

 

Sincerely yours,

GEORGE G. Dual-Imus,
00109065, Artillery, .Ommandiow.



Hon. Amman E. SARI-memo,
3577550: Restaurant/Wes. -

Warm REED Oriya-an, 
11.0., July .16, 1959.

um ML Sana-merino: The information requested in your telegram of July
13, 1959, concermng the brands and prices of watches now on sale in our post

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

was listed below:- 
Biraad of watch 9511 price (including Federal miss toe}
l?alndies? _.$26.i3 05 $33.23.

's 7.78 to .70.

?ain?iltonr $2 
gadie's? - $293 to $49.23.
en's .- 32. to $54.18.

Wittnauer .
?ames $229.3 $3 $44.55.

en's 8. 39.33..

Zodiac:

Ladies? $31-63 to $83953-
Men?s . $32.45 to $59.40.

Beams: 

Ladies? $28.60 to $63.53.
Men?s $30.53 to $47.58.

Bulova; -

Indies? $23.65 to $47.58..
Mens $28.60 to $54.18..

I?hnex,?assorted $5.50 to $13.75.
0, assorfm $11.28 to $13.48..

 

Emmge, assorted
Isouvic, assorted
Melburn, nurses only

Sincerely yours,

$11.28 to $17.33.
$13.48 to $29.70.
$23.85.

G. F. Sr. JOHN,
Brigadier Hormel, Medical Corps, commanding.

 

 
 
 
   
  
 
   
  
 
  
 
  
 
  
 
   
  
  
  
 
 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
   
   
   
   
  
 
  
 
  
  
  
  
  
   
     
 
 
  
   
  
 

    

86 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE .mnusrnr

-Mr. HJiBnirr. Before we leave the watch incident, I have just'b;
informed by Mr. Smart also that certain watch manufacturers 113'

what is known as a fair-trade rice on their watches and have?refua?. .

to sell ost exchanges on that asis.
. Mr. gmnnenno. I would like to know whether those watches. .3,
at a cheaper rate than do these watches. I don?t know. .

Mr .

fair-trade laws 

Mr. Yes. They?xtheir price. 

Mr. They ?x their price. And the post exchange C?nll?
sell them at that fair-trade price. 

. SANTANGELO. You mean it is higher than these prices at .

they are being sold now 3 

Mr. . Well, they could be higher or lower.

Mr. SANTANGELO. Well, if they were sold??

Mr. The fact remains that because of the fair-trade 
t_ice,' or the fair-trade insistence of the individual company, that pi r-

ticular or individual to submit their watches to .

post exchange, which, as you ow, is sold under the i rate or tli.
market value. fore, a post exchange cannot 115131151 fair-train
1138111. 

Mr. HARDY. Mr. Chairman, may I comment on that 3

I think the fair-trade laws have boon invalidated in Virginia, So i
wouldn?t apply to Fort Myer.

Mr. Hiisnnr. o. It may be invalidated in the State itself, but still
the manufacturer or the company has a right not to sell. 

Mr. HARDY. Then they wouldn?t sell in Virginia, I don?t think.

Mr. 1113an. They would. not be sold at the post exchange, then.

Mr. HARDY. They wouldn?t sell to an bOdy if they insist on the fag-u
trade price, I believe, under a Virginia upreme Court ruling.- I think
that is correct.

Mr. No. Perhaps it would be pro er in a commereiil

lace. But in a military establishment I don?t Stink it would appli?

ecause the milita establishment would not a .e to what the cot:-
pany insists on. in States which do not ave a fair-trade lit-Ir
the are obtained in circuitous means and not directly from thI
manufacturer. The are obtained from other people and then 301:!
under the fair-trade isting. 

'All right; I just wanted to clear that particular point up.

All ri ht, Mr. Courtney.

Mr. . I have just one further question, Mr. Santangela
At the top of page 

. r. SANTANGELO. Before you go into that, I would liketo r?efer'tgl
a letter which received, dated June 29 1959, from L. R. Heron, corii':
mander, Naval Reserve, retired. find I read from one of the an
agraphs. And I can submit this letter for the committee. It 1- at
fellows:

My activity in industry is limited strictly to the-area of engineering. mi
of the bulk of my colleagues is similarly limited to engineering, technical admit!-
istration, training, or the like. We all know that there are some of all ran!?
who. are legally and morally guilty of violating the prohibitions of in?ullql

peddling. I am sure you are aware, sir, that this group represents a small
minority, and I believe it to be vastly unfair to infer otherwise.

 
  

r. The proposition is this: You are familiarrwith t? .

 

I sub!

Mr. 
111911133 3"
You 
Whatei
hiring of
wells to
There
What
the meet
When
Mr. S.
Mr. 
mind 
Mr. Si
Mr. Ci
Mr. 
wouldn?t
I wou?
an o?cec
cent hiri'
Avco?g
I think,
we can?t
Mr.
Mr. San
whom sp
you to 91
retired it
Mr. S:
the recor
there are
they wer
ears without 
retired 
question?
once he 
Mr. Sn
by the de
ever, I th
are need:
made yes
but make
and Sew
tractor tc
able to th:
Mr. Cc
this, Mr.
refe'r
.-

  
  
   
 

EL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

'e leave the watch incident, I have just be .
also that certain watch manufacturers ha 
rade rice on their watches and have-'refuti .I
that asis. -
:uld like to know whether those watchess .
3 these watches. I don?t know. -.
position is this: You are familiarwith 1.

They ?x their price.
their price. And the post exchange calm,
price.

mean it is higher than these prices at whi..
could be higher or lower. .. I
1, if they were - -

remains that because of the fair-trade 
.istence of the individual company, that par:
1pany refuses to submit their watches to t. 
you know, is sold under the going rate or 
a post exchange cannot handle a fair- .

man, may I comment on that?
laws have been invalidated in Virginia, so 

.yer.

nay be invalidated in the State itself, but 
mmpany has a right not to sell. .
"wouldn?t sell in Virginia, I don?t think. I
?dnot be sold at the post exchange, then. .
ldn?t sell to an body 1f they insist on the fatj 
er a Virginia upreme Court ruling.- I thi'i -

rhaps it would be proper in a commerc' 
establishment I don?t think it would ap 
.blishment would not agree to what the col
1 States which do not have a fair-trade hi 
:1 circuitous means and not directly from 6. 
obtained frOm other peeple and then so? -

1g. 
id to clear that particular point up. 

y.

just one further question, Mr. Santangelit

ore you go into that, I would like'to r?efer'i -.
. dated June 29, 1959, from L. R. Heron, co -

.rve, retired. And I'read from one of the do,
mit this letter for the committee. It rea sin!

1

3 limited strictly to the area of engineering. 
is similarly limited to engineering, technical admih'
ke. We all know that there are some of all r??li?
ly guilty of violating the prohibitions of in?uen-

tre aware, sir, that this group represents a . -
be vastly unfair to infer otherwise.

RETIRED PERSONNEL 1N DEFENSE nanos'rsr 87

I 511 this Complete letter, which is in opposition to my position,
53,011 indicates that he thinks it is a small minority.
I Well, on that same pomt, then, I come your state-

ment, your prepared statement. At the top Of page 3, Mr. Santangelo.
You state? th
I as a created by extensive
?Entity ell-?13510 ?ilit?targenlifrsonnelem malehls ogacti?cgrof hirm_ retired O??icials
wells to the high heavens and races with missiles and alrcraft to outer space.
There is an omission there of some kind. .
What speci?cally do you have in md to say to the committee as
the masons for the conclusion wh1ch you expressed 
Whom do you have in mind? . 
Mr. SANTANGELO. The extent of the hirmg of ret1re_d o?icers. 
00' NEY. Can you name any that you speci?cally have 
and!

Mr. SANTANGELO. Asto any particular retired oi?cers?

Mr. COURTNEY. es, s1r. .

Mr. SANTANGELO. Well, you. are askmg me to speclfy, which I
wouldn?t like to do. .

I-would say that the situation as exposed in the 1956 report, where
an of?cer was engaged by McDonnell Aircraft, and. some of the re-
3611f hirings of retired o?cers, one by Ach?I think a capple by
disco?give me the ??create this aura. And th1s 1s a eehng,
Iii-?nk, even among the embers of the Congress, that even though
Wecan?t rove it, it is there. . .

Mr. URTNEY. Well, we are on the subject of proof the morning,
Mi". Sant lo. And could yOu tell the comn?ttee for the record
whom sp cally and what speci?cally in the way of persons caused
you to ress the conclusion that there had been extens1ve of
attired m1 'tary personnel?

Mr. SANTANGELO.- Well, I know there are 7 21 which were put into
the record and I think the chairman Of the committee indicated that
there are about 3 000 people goin to be called. I don?t know whether
they were all military personne or whether it included Reserve 
cars or civilian personnel attached to the procurement. But it seems
tame it goes above 700. And this is extens1ve hiring.

Mr. COURTNEY. And, of course, you were making that statement
without reference to the employment, the nature of the emplo merit of
rt?tired personnel; were you? Do you think it proper?and 1s is the
question?for an engineering of?cer to engage in engineering work
once he has been retired from the service? 

Mr. SANTA-NGELO. I think that an engineering oi?cer, if he is needed
by the defense contractor should have a right to go to work. How-
ever, I think there should be safeguards. think that people, If. they
unneeded by the defense contractor?and that is the suggestion I
made yesterday, that a commission be appointed, not by the m111tary,
but make it a nonmilitary group, under thesupervision Of the House
and Senate, which could pass upon applications by the defense con-
tractor to hire people who have techmcal knowledge which is service-
able to the defense contractor. 

Mr. Conn-rm. Well, then, _am I to Understand, for the _record,
th1s, Mr. Santangelo, that ,the phrase ?extensive hirlng? to which, you
had fe'rence, referred to the 721 'who' have been'listed here in the

.




 

 

 

  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
   
   
 
 
  
  
 
 
    
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
 
  
   
  
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
   
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
 
   

88 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN mnusrnr

pyublic record as

being emplOye'd by the 100 largest contractors int

nited States, without regard to whether Or not?rather, not wit-hem 
regard to?Twithout regard to the nature of their employment, and the h?n'mf:
duties which. they perform in this new employment? MI- 

Mr. SANTANGELO. There are at least 721. I know I found maybe -
dozen others. I believe there are more.

3

Now some'of those are chairmen of the board of directors. Others

are of high positions on the board of directors, or presidents oforgahi?
And others may have some technical Job in a departmeni,

where they are doing some technical work, and they may not reach the
issue of rocurement. 
Mr. Well, then, does your quarrel or your objection

zations.

center around th

who are engaged in other technical activities 
Mr. SANTANGELO. No. I think that a
procurement to exercise in?uence. I thin

riendly with th
people who let th
amount of help.

I think it is more
is working for the

Whether

8 goes

is on the inside, and he 
tunity to use his friendship or his former pos1tion or his relationshi?
with his former colleagues. .

Mr. COURTNEY. Now have you any suggestions as to how such-a
problem, if .it exists, could be met by legislation, regulation, or an;
Other means .Of supervision? . . ..

. SANTANGELO. Yes. I would take a general proposition, that we
would bar retired military o?icers from employment with the def.
contractors and have an escape clause whereby --this,committee,coul?
pass upon an application for employment with defense contractors. hf

committee feels thatthesepeo 1e are not of the type which co 5'6
lend an in?uence they should an 

Mr. OURTNEY. how in the next sentence, Mr. Santangelo, you leave

out the words ?retired military.? You say ?the practice efhiring,

retired of?cials.?

Mr. SANTANGELO. o, I am not. My reference to o?ic1als?I
talking-well, o?icials is broader. I think it is broader than the we

?retired.?
r. Pace.
Mr. Conner-mar.

Mr. SANTANGELO. That is correct. I think a great danger lies it:
those men who are in policymakin positions going with defense con-

tractors and gettin
. COURTNEY.
occurring?

. SANTANGELO. If they were not af?liated with a defense con:

tractor before they
of time.

Mr. COURTNEY. Let us supplose a Government o?cial is drawn from
a particular company, where 

a tour in the Government, and proba

That contemplates persons like the Secretary of the Arm};

procurement personnel as distinguished from these-

erson doesn?t have to be 3111
a person who may be very
procurement of?cer, or with the negotiatorsj?g?fgq
contracts?can obtain for their .eompanies a certain 

ave when we have a procurement o?cer whe
vernment that goes over to the other side,?
a procurement capacity, or another capacity,_,? 
knows what goes on, and he. has an oppe? 

 

orize employment.

JF-

ou are speaking. now Of a di??erent cate ory of?ae'w

H,

You mean former policymaking of?cials?

ijthe bene?t of eir former prestige. . .
how you would seek to prevent this situation

came into the service, I would bar them for a period

occupies a responsible position, serves
ly with the change of adminis

 

?cw-r?

F-



 

 

 

Ithink
under 1

govern
eonld 
9:
?ed
had 311:
?rm 
rhose 0:
Mr.
tion OE
is it
which
would
Goverl
Mr.
upon 
ing, 31?
makm
for on

'0d

mech

mg
goMr.
er'nme
are tr.
free?!
the sa.
Mr.
ment
we sa:
Mr.
he ha:
the 
MEI:
bones
the 
_Mr
mitte
hence
elimi
if his

RSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

mp10yed by the 100 largest contractors int-1
egard to whether or not?rather, not with; 
rd to the nature of their employment, and thy
in this new employment? 
are are at least 721. I know I found maybe,
here are more. 

a chairmen of the board of directors. 0th
the board of directors, or presidents of:organi.
ay have some technical job in a departing?.
as technical work, and they may not reachfgi].

then, does your quarrel or your objecting
cement personnel as distinguished 
technical activities? . . 

I think that a erson doesn?t have tO-b??nl-
in?uence. I thi a erson who may be vei-j'
.rement of?cer, or with the negotiators-?n
Lots?can obtain for their companies a certai'nh

are when we have a procurement of?cer who.
rernment that goes over to the other ?lliw
.?ocurement capacity, or another capacity,
knows.what goes on, and he. has an oppqg
lip or his former position or his relationshii
as. .
have you any suggestions as, to how such
met by legislation, regulation, or an;
. . 
I would take a general proposition, that;
'y of?cers from employment with-the def-n .
escape clause committee can i
for employmentwith defense contractors I 
.thesepeo 1e are not of the type which can! i
'hould au orize employment. 
1 the next sentence, Mr. Santangelo, you lea.
military.? 'Yousay ?the practice 
speaking now of a different category Off??
I am not. My reference to of?cials?I 7a
broader. I think it is broader than the worth
lates persons like the Secretary of the Arm I

can former policymaking of?cials?

3 is correct. I think a great danger lies-:1:
.cymakin positlons going with defense cs
me?t of em former prestige. - 
3w you would seek to prevent this situsti1 I

my were not a?liated with a defense cc, I
1to the service, I would bar them for a peri?

:uppose a Government o?icial is drawn frank
are he compass a responsible position, servl?
ly with the change of adminitzl

and probe.

 

RETIRED musrnr 89

cation would be relifeved of?o?ge; would you have some to
- turn in tohis ormer rm. .
My sense of equity would come mto play, and
I rpm]: the committee?s sense of equity would come into play. I would
5131- those circumstances, because he made a sacn?ce to come to the
at" eminent, permit him to go back to his former company, but I
?zzla put a maximum on amount of contracts that his former com-
ing could get. At least limit it to the extent that his company r1?-
Lived before. At least you know he got that many contracts before 

had any in?uence.

- 133m Y. Now what would be the situation if his former

3323: merged or out of business? What plans would you have 

I . es? .
all]: Smmadlnio. Then the equity doesn?t obtain. Then the situa-
?gn of ving a position with a company is no longer ex1st1ng. He
is ?ust ?e anybedy else going out an getting new employment. .

it: COURTNEY. Well, supposing he has a limited talent and ca?w
which is technically useful only to a certain kind of industry. at
would you as. he must do after havmg served a perlod of time in the
government or 1, 2, or 3 years? . .

Mr. SANTANGELO. I would still her him, because first Pmnlise
upon which you stated it, that he. has a hm1ted capac1ty_to earn a . v-
i: doesn?t apply because if he IS b1g enough _to come Into a pol1cy-
2? "position with the Government he certainly is not a poor man,
for one thing. He may be an awfully wealthy man, and had to dis?
gorge some of his own stock to obtam employment w1th the Govern-
want. And it wouldn?t be too much of .a hardshipto bar him for a
period of years in order to elimmateothis poss1ble m?ugnce.

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, under those circumstances doesn that pretty
much limit Government oil?ciails to a clatsgs of people who are solvent

andwillremainsoven in on . . 
??nslammenm. These gent??ineigi, as I see it, who you: the Gov-

ernment don?t come in for primarily or' ostensibly1 for pro?t. They"

tryin to render a service to the country whic calls them. And
Ef?uent]? their ?nancial position is such that they don?t need even
m?lgunmv. Well, would you limit the employment of Govern-
ment Of?cials in the policymakmg branches to those who are, shall
wesa .intheluxu class. 

Mrlr?SANTA-ivennolyDe?nitely not. I think everyone has a right, if
he has the ability, whether he is rich or poor, to obtam a osition w1th
the Government 1f he can re?ider the service, and 1f the remdent or
an bod thinks hehas that a i it .

{In 6013mm. I will ask youlishe question: What does a poor and
honest :man' who has served his Government 'do ?4 after he departs
the-Federal service, perhaps involuntarily? 

Mr. Smanenm. That is a situat1on I would leave to the com-
n?ttee, which would look into the fact whether he was a poor and
West man. And if the equities were?there, then I would say they
?lmiuate the prohibition and permit him to go back to employment,-
- his condition was such.



  
    
  
  
   
  
  
   
  
   
 
 
 
   
   
   
 
  
  
 
 
 
   
 
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
   

 

90 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

But I would make it as a ?general rule that he would be barred g1 .
a period of time unless the equities were such that he should go ban-g
to employment. 4
Dir. COURTNEY. Well, do you think this Government could Opera 
successfu?y or ought to be expected to operate on a personal bag:
where each citizen who might be employed would have a dl?'erei.
rule applied to him from his brothers throughout the street
Wouldn that invite more in?uence and more coercion for in.
Idivirdiueals, against the present system which purportedly is across 
ca . .
Mr. SANTANGELO. My general premise is that we bar all of the].-

and, if there are equities 1n the case of any person which should mag?
him, I think a nonmilitary group should pass 11pm

an exception out 
it and permit it. . .
Mr. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman;

Mr. Hiinnar. Thank you. .

Mr. Hess? 

Mr. HEss. I have no questions.

Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Winstead? .

Mr. WINSTEAD. No questions.

Mr. Hrisrmr. Mr. Gavin?

Mr. Germ. I haven?t any questions. 

Mr. Eisner; I just want to clear up one thing, Mr. Santangelo.

I understood you to say that in conversation with me I said I W3. 

goin to call seine 3 0.00 people.
horns of @0113?)

Mr. SANTANGELO. I did say that. I think you and I one. television 

broadcast? .

Mr. I-IEBERT. I said thereuwere probably 3,000 involved' I didn?t:

say were going to call them. If you didn?t say that, .it is all r' ht.
Mr. SANTANGEID. I thought you said you .were'going to thei?:
because I said, .?FWhen do you think you are going to ?nish with 3,0 ..

P901319 3? #531615 ?We are. going to get some legislation by the next"

sess1on.?
Mr.- PRICE. Mir. Chairman I thinkhe meant poll.

Mr. Ham. P011. I didn?t hear him; My hearing is bad this.

mornin . But I didn?twant therecord to re?ect that. 
Mr. EANTANGELO. I know you did say you sent out questionnaires
to over 3,000.
Mr. HEBERT. That, is correct. -- 
Mr. SANTANGEID. I assume if any and all of these 3,000 people
had some information which you wanfe? you would call the 3,000,
The amendment offered by me was as ollows: On page 25 cf th?
Defense appropriation bill, after line 17, add a new section as follows-E?
General provisions. Section 301. None or the funds contained in this titl?
may be used to enter into a contract with any person, organisation, company, 9
concern which provides compensation to a retired or inactive military or na -
general of?cer who has been an active member of the military forces or the
United States Within 5 years- of the date of enactment of this act.
That Was the amendment I offered on the ?00r. of the House. 
Mr. HEss. That would mean, then that any retired o?icerof .a
general rank could not be hired by a defense contractor, even though
he was hired as an engineer or a scientist or some position in that gen~
eral category.

11an
in! 1-. SA:
pro
matinee
1511'. SAJ

. t. 
HI.
glared 131?
?0191210115
Rafi-113E011
Mr: as
it?
3, 
#1231111}.
?nal-'1?
sir. H1
311?. 
was?
mints 

Well;
hrcauSe'.
plate 533,
me.
in? ad
a. -li1ilita
plate es}
But a:



     

?rim-i=1 is 9-1-1. "r13- 







.. 3"
eggs

=1
31 
eggs

    
   

   
  
 
  

 

 

92 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN. DEFENSE INDUSTRY

   

Mr. SANTANGELO. That was the total number of names I had at 
time I offered the amendment.

Mr. H?enar. All right.

Mr. Gavin?

Mr. GAVIN. 0.

Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. H?enar. Mr. Price.

Mr. PRICE. You ut your 40 names in the record prior to Sens
Douglas? speech in the Senate? .

Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes, I did. As a matter of fact, 1115 list of nan
came about 2 weeks after my amendment, and about 10 days aft?i I
submitted a list of 45 names and the companies with which they-5? ..
a?liated. 

Mr. 'Mr. orblad. .

Mr. NORBLAD. You mentioned the question about eo le other-? .
retired of?cers?you mentioned an err-Secretary of or Hit
or Defense. You did not include them in your amendment, and-i
aafril Endermg why. Frank Pace you referred to a minute egg-s
c1 .

Mr. yfilmEmmanuel I had dif?culty in trying to pass the rules oft?
House, on a point of order. I had to get past the point of order wh 
was raised. 

That may be one of the reasons I left it out. 

Mr. Nonnmn. When did you introduce your bill that you refer;
to in your statement yesterday? Subsequent to the o?'ermg of :1 I
amendment or before 3 '1

Mr. SANTANGELO. Subsequently.
Mr. Nome. That is all. 
Mr. SAN-muouno. And I would like to state this: This is not;E -
total amount of information which caused me to introduce the amw i
ment.
In executiVe committee, there were statements made by! some: 
the members of the Defense A propriation Committee ioh ind
cated to me that there were indpustrial pressures. And I don?t Wll_
todisclose who made those remarks. .
Secondly, in regardin the book by Drew Pearson and read-mi
about certain situations, just didn?t like the whole atm here.
Now, it was after the executive committee and after full Ag
Bropriations Committee met and discussion took place on the defeall:
ill, that I formulated my thinking with respect to the type of amnesia:
ment I would introduce. I had to overcome the point of order, why!
I anticipated, and I thought that my amendment would cry - 
the situation.
?Mr. Human Is that all?
Mr. Nome. That is all.
Mr. H?enar. Mr. Hardy.
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, before? you get to Mr. Hardy.
Mr. Human Mr. Price, yes. 
Mr. Puree: You state that your interest developed during till-
eourse of the hearing before the subcommittee of which you are
member :in reference? - .
Mr. SAMANGILO. Mr. Price, I am not. a member. of the Defel
Subcommittee. 

  

     
   
   
   
 
     
       
       
  
   
  
     
        
  
     
     
          
  
        
      
  
 

   

 
  

   

      
  
 
 
 
 
  

    
   
  
   
 
   

 
 
    
  

  

    
   
    
   

 
 

  

PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

was the total number of names I had at 

1 8111:
ha

rman.

Lee. 
your 40 names in the record prior to Senate.
ienate 3 
as, I did. As a matter of fact, his list of 11am. 
her my amendment, and about 10 days after 
ames and the companies with which they-war.

'blad. .

entioned the question about eo le other th
ntioned an ear-Secretary of this rmy or a}1w
mt include them in your amendment, and
rank Pace you refeHed to a minute ago, 8130;

. - a? I
rd dif?culty in trying to pass the rules of' 
er. I had to get past the point of order WhnEiiltl

rgasons I left it out. .
1 you introduce your bill that you re?ned, 
:terday? Su sequent to the offering of.- - 
equentl .
U. 



I would like to state this: This is not-sting?
on wh1ch caused me to introduce the amenig';
a, there were-statements made by someoi'
use. A propnation Committee which indair
re 1n ustnal pressures. And I don?t ?want'

the 11061: Drew Pearson and readin .
just didn?t I the whole ?5

thinking resp

11, before? you get to Mr. Hardy.
yes.

1313 your interest developed durin' 
re the subcommittee of which you ?nish;

ice, I am not a member of the Defense

 

RETIRED PERSONNEL musrnr 93

?331? Ona r0 riations.
EENTANGEID. 1p dams}? member of the Appropriations 
MI: PRICE. You stated that it .came as, the result of a statement from
defense o?iCials or defense o?icers, that mdustrial pressure had been
?Sig: SANTANGELO. Mr. Price, inroading some of_the reports, I had
ihdse which were nebulous and indicated something was wrong to

but I just couldn?t justify putt1ng In a bill at that pomt. I read,
Pearson?s book, Second Class Power? and certam
Situations were disclosed there. Certain statemans by Colonel. N1ck-

Mr. SANTANGELO. I made my mind tip to introduce the amendment
after I heard the discussion on the de ense appropriation 1n the
fillcommittee.

aking declsions as to which type of missile we should
?t

Mr. Peron. But this discussion, though, was among members of the
oomittee, rather than from witneses before you.

ting the Defense suddenl left his position with
the Defense Establishment to accept a position W1th industry? 
. -. SANTANGEIQ. ?It wouldn?t look good to me..
Mr. Peron. Why not?
Mr. Smanenno. Well, in the ?rst

to have appraised certain types of may weapons or Instruments, and

.Pmcn. How do one reach this by law? 

Mr. SANTANGELO. ell, ?gople in the Service frequently think of
employment with a defense contractor after he retires: or leaves. Now,
may try to ingratiate himself with a defense contractor, by, either
gIVing him bids or appro certain specl?catlons which lend them-

selves to-a defense contractor peculiar -
Now, what his thinking is, I don?t ow.

Mr. lgsicn. Do youhave a feeling, then, that

But that is nonnal
erhaps the greatest

ment, where it is held out before he retires 3
441.12?59??1'

1n the employment of retired personnel is a vancement in re?r/

 

 
 
  
   
  
  
 
 
 
   
     
   
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
  
 
   
   
    
  
  
 
   
  
  
  
 
  
   
  
    
  
 
   
 
 
  
  
  

     
 

94 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

. Mr. SANTANGELO. Yes; I think it is a stron

        
   

. factor. Thinking In, 
1s gomg to get employment with a com any, he may favor that afi 
ticultar company, hopmg that when he oes retire Mr. PRICE. That is all Ihave, Mr. Chairman. 5?
Mr. Hansen All right. Mr. Hardy. 
-. Mr. HARDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. . tor 
. Now, Mr. santangelo, a while ago when Mr. Courtne was qua; . 

tioning you the discussion went along the line of spec' cs. Andf I 
believe he asked whether you had an speci?c instances that ha" 
come to your attention ofwrongdoing by military personnel. I his}, 
lieve you indicated that you had no speci?cs or you didn?t want sf i
discuss speci?cs.

Mr. SANTANGELO. o, Congressman Hardy. I Speci?cally star: I,
in my ?rst speech that I had no speci?c instances of any wrongdoi 
And I made that clear.

Mr. HARDY. I thou ht that I understood that.

Mr. SANTANGELO. There not accused anyone particularly of an
dishonesty or any criminal action.

Mr. HARDY. You did refer to a speci?c case that came 11 in t1;

report from the Government Operations Committee, heade by M.
Holi?eld.

Mr. Yes.

Mr. HARDY. ow, Mr. Courtney asked you whether Congress shoest- 
act on the basis of suspicions. And I take it he was talkin abs}: 
whether Congress should pass legislation. And you answe in ti -
ne tive.

r. SANTANGELO. Should they??well I didn?t answer in the no: 
tire. If you feel, you gentlemen feel that there is no in?uence, the
I say that no legislation is necessary. 

I tried to Spell it out in one of my statements by showing the 13 .
crease in volume of business, which is the only way I know how, excejl -
as to getting speci?c cases of people who will testify that there
in?uence.

Mr. HARDY. In any event you would not attempt to take speci? 
action against an individual on the basis of snapicion. You have"? 
have proof for that. -

Mr. SANTANGELO. I certainly would not?if I didn?t have som .
proof, I wouldn?t mention a person?s name. 
Mr. HARDY. T?Vellfl now, we have had other discussion here concern.


in conditions whi create suspicion. And certainly we have fo 

  
    
    
    
     
  
    
   
  
     
  
 
  

a at of cases where the standards that ap 1y to Caesar?s wife hai - gig. mg
not always a plied to the military after'they - ave retired. . I in?ame
But should) Congress act to prohibit action which creates a situatrc Mr. 
that almost automatically creates sus icion? your 39
Mr. SANTANGELO. I certainly thin that under these cimlunshanc Emission
they should enact legislation. I uin?t 
Mr. now, Mr. Price raised a question about a try; - Mr.
of situation. At least that is what I took it to be. That was 1 Mr. 

reference was made to an inspector in a defense plant that folui ?512?! you.
. r. H.

 

 

ERSONNEL 1N DEFENSE INDUSTRY

as; I think it is a stron factor. Thinking h;
ment with a com any, may favor that an
1g that when he oes retire have, Mr. Chairman.
ht. Mr. Hardy.
on, Mr. Chairman. 
o, a while ago when Mr. Courtney was querE.
lion went along the line of speci cs. And 3,
1er you had any speci?c instances that has?
of wrongdoing military personnelspeci?cs or you didn?t want ti 
Congressman Hardy. I speci?cally state?l.?
I had no speci?c instances of any wrongdoing. .
clear. 
that understood that.
ave not accused anyone particularly of any
a1 action.
refer to a speci?c case that came 13) in th I
ment Operations Committee, heade by Mr,-

Courtney asked you whether Con ss should.I
icions. And I take it he was about.
I pass legislation. And you answered in the 
11d they?~well, I didn?t answer in the nega-
antlemen feel that there is no in?uence, thell
snecessary. .

.n one of my statements by showmg the 1:er
ass, which is the only way I know how, except.)
as of people who will testify that there 

ent you would not attempt to take speci?ca
ual on the basis of suspicion. You have?tos

rtainly would not?if
a person?s name. 
"we have had other diScussmn here concerns:
he suspicion. And certainly we have foundi.
tandards that apply to Caesar?s wife he?:
iilitary after they have retired. . 

to prohibit action which creates a situates-ml
:reates sus icion? 
ainly thi that under these circumstance 


11.
Mr. Price raised a question about a type!
is what I tool': it to be. That was why! .
inspector in a defense plant that foun'if

I

I didn?t have some

  
    

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN INDUSTRY 95

himself employed by the contractor whose plant he had been serv-
rm. . . .
??ow would you say thatls a situation that creates suspicion?

MI ANTANGELO. It certainly does to me.

an. HARDY. That creates suspicion in your mind. But that inspec-
tor wouldn?t very likely be of?cer.

Mr Sanmneano. He may not be a general o?cer.

Mr. HARDY. Not very often would you ?nd a general of?cer serving
:5 an inspector n1 a defense plant. 

311.; That could very well be.

3,11- HARDY. Then the approach which you made didn?t go far
mough down the line. 

Mr. The approach that I made did not go far enough

. eneral of?cer.

Mr. HARDY. Then 1t would be your thou that you would have to
enter all ranks insofar as Situations whic arouse suspicion or have
.opportumty for wrongdoing is concerned?

Mr SANTANGELO. we: dn?t go that far.
should go'thai far, but from a practical basis the little Inspector
1' don?t 1: car: carry the in?uence later, except on a lower level.

Hangar. Would it nemassanly he a matter of in?uence later,
might 1t poss1bly be a conSJderation for performance while he was
aim-91360?? I

.You say logically I

Mr. SANTANGEIO. Logically I can agree with you Mr. Hard- that
It?arould apply to an mspector even though he w?re not a gJeiaex-al
0; car.

- 1 award to a defense nt I - .
mgoyigd by that (?in tractor? co rector, ?nds himself
.. 1? IANTANGELO- say that is one of the situations which smell
. alittlefunthertha tht. -- 
?91.7 o?icer 8? and say the supe

Mr. SANTANGEED. It IS a stronger and more un
Mr. Hanan Even though the elaperior n?t pearticipate in

 

[the negotiations, on won (I consi er th ll 
I of impmiixiet a 01 a stronger
I think it creates that inference And, of course
yonrioggnjeral premise that deve? though he didn participate 1s a
can? ans - -
udn?t .- articipate. we on know whether he did par-Incipate or
gr. Ilium Y. All right, Mr. Chairman.


. kouve muchM,S ta 
your attendance aan testify?, ny. an ngelo
Thank you very much.

We appre-

. SANTANGELO.

 

 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 

 

96 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

(The documents furnished by Mr. Santangelo are as follows 
VENTURA, Gama, June 2.9, 1.953,

  
  
   
 
    
 
    
  
  
   
     
 
    
 
   
   
   
 
  

Hon. F. Enwann 
House 017206 Building, 
Washingtom 19.0. 
M3 Dunn This letter is written in regard to the investiga;
into the employment of retired service o?icers in industry, about to be uni
taken by the House subcommittee of which you are the chairman. -
I, along with many of my fellow retired of?cers, have looked with some diam
on the action recently undertaken by Hon. Alfred E. Santangelo, of New Yo
in attempting to attach a rider on the defense appropriation bill, which We!
have precluded the awarding of contracts to, any ?rm employing general 
o?icers retired within the past 5 years. Although I am not in the categ.
concerned, I nonetheless abhor this broad guilt?by?association type of approl
to the problem.
I am a. commander, 13.8. Naval Reserve, retired at the age of 37, after 20?
years of continuous active service I should like to think, along with others]
me, that my position in industry is held by virtue of technical ability, that is?n
who, but what, I know. My retirement from the service, although ostens'i?
voluntary, was dictated by the provisions of the Naval Reserve Act wh?
normally requires those with 20 years of active service to seek retirement, orli
the risk of being involuntarily released to inactive duty without retired?
The so-called hump in the rank structure from lieutenant commander throv
captain and comparable ranks in the other branches of the armed services, hi
caused countless numbers of my regular service colleagues to apply for red?

ment.
A very, very substantial number of us are technical specialists. This rep

sents a primary reason unto itself why-many of us could not hope to aspirgfii?
higher rank or longer service. In my own case, which is typical, I have ii:
15 years? service experience in the ?eld of electronics and guided missiles. ji?
record shows that I am considered to be a tap specialist in my ?eld of endeai-Iu
but that my service activity was restricted to ?eet and operating comnnu?
naval air stations, and to technical training activities?not to bureau leii?
supply, or procurement agencies.

It-is obvious from my experience that upon retirement, I should seek lions}
able and desirable employment within-my area. of specialization. It. is a
obvious that such employment might only be found in the area of defense 
tractors. Already existing restrictions make it di?icult to obtain civil se 
eniployment without the risk of con?ict with dual compensation statutes. ,jpi
larly existing restrictions prohibit activity in, the area of sales to 

a ciesgift}; activity in industry is limited strictly to the area of engineering. That!
the bulk of my colleagues is similarly limited to engineering, technical admin:
istration, training, or the like. We all know that there are some ofall ranksijihl
are legally and/or morally guilty of violating the prohibitions on in?uence 115$
dling. I am'sure you are aware, s'ir, that this group represents a small minoiily.
and I believe it to be vastly unfair to infer otherwise. Our technical know-h?l'
combined with practical experience seldom possessed by those without benen?vl
military background, makes us able 'to continue making a signi?cant 
to the defense effort -

Although it does not seem generally realized, most of us ?are able to ?ll
quicker, and often less expensive methods of problem solution than oar. no!
military contemporaries. In? my own case, in the 10 months since my reign?
ment in 1958, I have supervised the complete technical engineering .p ?11
which will' make! it possible for the ?rst time for the Navy to achieve rel];
communications in the Arctic area at a tiny fraction of the costs in
over the years without similar reliability. I am currently engineering mana?r
in? the field, for the installation of one of the most complex instrumentation: I
terns yet undertaken in the missile. range ?eld. I work with military and 
service engineers and supervise a large group of electronic and civil - 1 :15,
My intimate knowledge of service routine and acute avvareness of a rigid
schedule is saving the taxpayers manydollars and days. Again, I believe 
illustration to be typical of the young, technically competent retiree or .2.
even more experienced administrator.

The Honorable Mr. Santangelo and some others have inferred that many Iii?-
tired of?cers are holding ?fat? jobs in industry. This may be true of a very f6?

  
  

     
    
   

 

     

i-H' 154d a-aH-m-n- -H 

rage

 

RSONNEL IN INDUSTRY

ished by Mr. Santangelo are as follows 
CAUSE, June 29,1359.

This letter is written in regard to the investigate
ired service o?cers in industry, about to be 1m 
littee of which you are the chairman.

fellow retired o?icers, have looked with some diam 
rtaken by Hon. Alfred E. Santangelo, of New Yg.? --
ider on the defense appropriation bill, which was
of contracts to any firm employing general 015 
last 5 years. Although I am not in the categ;i 
lor this broad guilt-by-association type of approi. 

iaval Reserve, retired rvice. I should like to think, along with others; 
ltry is held by virtue of technical ability, that is; 
retirement from the service, although osten??_  
the provisions of the Naval Reserve Act .
20 years of active service to seek retirement, or: 
?y released to inactive duty without retired I 
ink structure from lieutenant commander thr' 
's in the other branches of the armed services, h: 
my regular service colleagues to apply for red.

    
  
 
  
  
   
  
  
    
 
  
  
   
   
 
   
  

umber of us are technical specialists. This re; .
itself why many of us could not hope to aspirj
e. In my own case, which is typical, I hav i 
the ?eld of electronics and guided misSiles. .
:lered to be a top specialist in my ?eld of endeasi; 
was restricted to ?eet and operating comma; .
echnical training activities?not to bureau fa 
es. .

:rience that upon retirement, I should seek hon 
:nt within?my area of It. is a; 
might only be found in the area of defense
lstrictions make it dif?cult to obtain civil 
of conflict with dual compensation statutes. a? 1
-hibit activity in_ the area of sales to, Glovernitr?I

mited strictly to the area of engineering. Thai; 
similarly limited to engineering, technical adll' -

We all know that there are some of ,all ranked. 4'
ilty of violating the prohibitions on in?uencejl"
re, air, that this group represents a small minoii 
u?air to infer otherWise. Our technical know-% 4
ience seldom possessed by those without beneii 2"
able to continue making a signi?cant contribul 

generally realized, most of us ?are able "to 
sive methods of problem solution than our-ii
ny own case, in the 10 months since my res 
sed the complete technical engineering . 
rr the ?rst time for the Navy to achieve reli?
area at a tiny fraction of the costs incui 
reliability. I am currently engineering mana?
of one of the most complex instrumentationla
ssile range field. I work with military and .
a a large group of electronic and civil engi .
ice rou?n'e and acute awareness of a rigid f-
as many dollars and days. Again, I believe ij 
young, technically competent retiree or OBI
rator.
lo and some others have inferred that many 
obs in industry. This may be true of a very f5.-

 

RETIRED PERSONNEL nv pursues Issuers? 97

- and undeserving, but it is most certainly not true of the majori .
?tdme paid comfortable, but certainly not ?fat? salaries. My 03!
"we, is comparable to that of an active-duty commander, but without the tax
lithium-9 afforded the active duty personnel by virtue of rental and subsistence
uses. I am paid a salary which is comparable to my civilian, nonmilitary
issues of equivalent experience. Again, I am sure my case is typical.
waster Doug-lag appears to abhor the number of retired personnel employed
?the major defense contractors. He particularly deplo'res the percentage of
arrest defense contracts which are negotiated rather than awarded on the

hats of competitive bidding,

undone)? to make many of us feel unclean in the public eye. Those Senators
congressmen who have thoughtlessly labeled us as the ?in?uence peddling
Mgr-s of fat jobs? have rendered us and the country a serious disservice.

if it becomes necemary to tighten up already existing restrictions, or take
We action against speci?c individuals, then this is "certainly in order. I
meg air, that asrde from this, both the House and Senate investigations will

-- .L.R.-Hnaon, --
Commander, UHS Nepal Reserve (Retired) .

 

Representative. Sanranenno,
Hrs; House of Representatives,
Washington, D. 0. 
_Dli'as I spent over 30 years in the Air Force and I have
feud that the grea est in?uence in the award of weapon systems contracts



lucrative racket.
hocking locally here you will ?nd one of the prime contractors with
three retired AF lieutenant generals on their payroll. Two of these generals
were retired on a permanently disabled status. One couldn?t wait until the
?twacsr Enegh on iris orgiers, in 1957, to take his chair as viCe presi-
eo er sa own aco olic and was retired fro th
?F?ur ngseg? heart attack. AF after a
ever ills will be inheriting another retired as lieutenant general. It
Eras announced he will be employed as ?technical consults t?
prime missile manufacturers. - by three AF
- over 14,000 AF o?icers in all grades on some form of retirement status,
west chhitmOSt of them must be employed by the defense industry here on the
I could go on and on giving you my 
. personal views on this criminal actlvi
of hwy $111235; (brasg, air?eld gilvhe you??interlocking" cases, but all I want to do til;
- ur 1s gusedo ceeve succ i
above high brass out of business. ry ess :1 your pursuit to run the
Sincerely,

Yon]:
(Who spent too much time in the Air Force trying to do an h?est job).

also an admirer of Senator Margaret Smith.

 

 

 

98 RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

SHORT HILLs, N, 1?
Representative Arr-silo E. Snnransnto,
House Opioe Building,


DEAR Mn. SANTANGELO: I read where you wish to investigate the iniiu. .
of retired career service of?cers upon military procurement and developm
I suggut? you also investigate the industrial lobbying now going on in Gongi-J
I cite one example. I

Senator Jackson, of Washington, has been in the forefront of the ?ght on. 
Army?s Nike-Zeus missile. By strange coincidence the rival Bomarc is ni .
by Boeing Aviation in his home State. A. T. T. makes the Nike-Zeus and . 
fear of being labeled a monopolist lobbyist A. T. 8: T. has taken neactioii 1
support of the Army?s position. Then too the NikeZeus project is only a sin
part of their vast program, where Bomarc is a big part of Boeing's. 

This is tragic example of where the choice of weapons is being made .
solely on what is best for the Nation but upon what industrial ?rms hav'?? 
most in?uence in Congress. The ascendancy of the Air Force over the Arm-y 
Navy can be credited (or blamed) upon the huge aircraft corporations is 
multibiilion dollar contracts gave them a vested interest in playing down 
need for a nuclear navy and a better armed and mobile Army. Thanks to ti. 
in?uence in Congress we have stressed for the past 10 years a ?Big Bom
defense system. The result is that we are woefully behind in missiles and 1
are waking up to a need for conventional forces for brush?re wars.

The danger is that this huge industry will maintain our present unba 
in favor of their own pet products. We will wind up with an obsolete 
and Army in order that the aircraft industry he saved from a recession.

MULLEN, 
1.
JUNE 7, 1959'. 

Dun Sin: I had a chance to read back papers, and I see you are 
about retired generals. I looked you up and ?nd you come from New York, I

Enclosed are the ads from the week?s U.S. News World Report. Tm? 
what has in?uenced things, not the generals One of those New York comps 
GE. and Western Electric, has the Nike-Zeus. Did they back the. Army u? 
testify for it? You read about how bad things are in Michigan, and yet 'i
let the Jupiter get away when even I knew it was a better missile. 

It?s the same way now on this BomareNike Hercules thing. My husband 
fighter pilot and he and his gang say the day they take away their ?ying-4:3 -
and assign them to a Bomarc squadron, they resign from the Air Force. Si 
we have four small children, this worries me to death.

He says the oldest generals ?ght the Army from habit, then there?s a grin 
of younger ones going for missiles because they are past ?ying anyway. If 
ask why don?t they write memos against, they say they have to write what i
general wants or else they will be rated no good as staff of?cers. .

Obviously I can?t sign my name and probably shouldn?t write this, but I 
someone would put up a ?ght to turn some of these things over to the Army 
to counteract these ads that a missile is an airplane before we have no job.

I

PHILADELPHIA PA.
Hon. Ammo E. Sam-memo, 
67.8. Representative, New York. I
DEAR Mu. SANTANGELO: I wish to express appreciation for your alert acids!
about high ranking service of?cers going into questionable places in val-id!
private industries serving the defense program.
Too much of this is not for good?as far as the taxpayer goes. The past-ll!
years have been a solid walkover for retired brass and it sure smells of honey;-
Yours truly,

Eowann COURTNEY. 
Mr. HEBEET. Admiral Rickover, have a seat. .
Admiral Where do you wish me to sit? Here, Sir?
Mr. HEBERT. Right there, sir.

The committee Will be in order.

 

 
  
  
 

PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

Snosr HILL 
El. SANTANGEID, s, h'z'

.0: I read where you wish to investigate the in?ue. 
2e officers upon military procurement and developmi- -

atigate the industrial lobbying now going on in Congr;

JWashington, has been in the forefront of the ?ght 011-1 5

Lie. By strange coincidence the rival Bomarc is

iult is that we are woefully behind in missiles and
in: Eonventional forces for brush?re wars. 
uge industry will maintain our present unbalai.
at products. We will wind up with an obsolete 
he aircraft industry he saved from a recession. 

T. Murmurs, q; .

JUNE 7, 195$. I
we to read back papers, and I see you are complaint .. 
looked you up and ?nd you come from New York. 

rom the week's 118. News World Report.

 

arc squadron, they resign from the Air Force. Sit.
I, this worries me to death. - -
rals ?ght the Army from habit, then there?s a grog-i
missiles because they are past ?ying anyway. If y:
nemos against, they say they have to write what 1 .-
willberated no goodassta?'o?icers. 
name and probably shouldn?t write this, but I

ht to turn some of these things over to the Army'ai 
a missile is an airplane before we have no job. .

 

 

 



PHILADELPHIA Pa.
10,

trio.

I wish to express appreciation for your alert audit?
of?cers going into questionable places in vents?
edefense program. f: .
'or good?as far as the taxpayer goes. The past 
kover for retired brass and it sure smells of honelv.

EDWARD COURTNEY. 
Rickover, have a seat. 
'here. do you wish me to sit? Here, sir?
are, em
11 order.

   
    
   

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY 99

. Rickover we welcome on to a pear this morning before
u, ?mtee, to hav,e the bene?t ofyyour mildrmation.
inor the record, would you please identify yourself.

STATEMENT OF VICE ADM. H. G. RICKOVER, USN

Admiral Rionovnn. am Vice Adm. H. G. Rickover, assigned to the
?,3ij Energy Comm1ssion. .

My I?I?nnum. Now, would you lease rise and take the oath. .

You do solemnly swear that testimony you will give before this
?Mommittee in the matters now under conSideration Will be the truth,
thewhole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

Admiral RIGKOVER. I do,_31r. . 

Mr Eisner. Now, Admiral Itickover the attention of the commit-
flushes been called to public testimony which 501i gave before the sub-
gmumittee of the Committee on Government perations of the House
.?fBepi-esentatives, March 20, 1959, on the subject ?Organization and
Vglmegement of Meade Programs.? .

I now read to you an excerpt from that testimony. It reads as fol-
Iowa, at page 631. Mr. Roback asked this question of you, Mr. Roback
being the counsel for the subcomm1ttee in question 

Admiral, you don?t supervise a procurement organization, and so you are not
,mMy exposed to various kinds of in?uences which have to' do with Gov-
ailment buying or contracting.

Admiral chnovnn. Oh, yes; I am.

Roman. The question is, Do you have visits from former associates,
admirals, military peonle? -

admiral 3103:0an I used to, but the word got around that I am obtuse in this
regard. I don't think I have had a visit now for 2 years, a visit or a visitation.

Mr. Reason. They just leave you alone?

Admiral Rioxovun. get pretty well left alone. Let me amplify that. I myself

m?t get pressured by outsiders, but they do go higher up and get pressure put on
Iris: that way. They know that it is of. no avail to come to me, but they do go
higher up, and I sometimes get pressures as a result of that.

Mr. Roman. Are the pressures in the nature of recommendations as to where
a titan-act award should be made, or how it should be made?

RIOKOVER. It is generally in the nature of urging me to undertake new
projects which we consider not As you know, in this modern day
and age, it is almost subversive not to want to spend Government money. The
real pressure we get is to undertake more projects to spend more money.

Now, Admiral Rickover, we are here this morning to ask you spe?
ci?c questions in accordance with the excerpt from the testimon
which I have just read. And the committee will con?ne itself to this
excerpt and to the uestions which are raised therein, and we wish that
you would so con ne yourself?just to these questions and no other
matters which are not before the committee at this time.

We will try to be as direct in our questioning as we possibly can, and
we hope that you will respond in that temper.

Now, I ask you, Admiral Rickover, the ?rst question: Do you have
visits from former associates, admirals, military people 3

I used to, but the word got around that I am obtuse in this regard. I don?t
think I have had a visit now for 2 years, a visitor or a visitation.

New, Admiral, the committee asks you what former associates, ad-
mirals, and the military people called on you until they stopped calling

on 0119
Aydmiral Ricnovnu. May I make 'a statement, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Hsnnur. If your reply is to that statement; yes, sir.

 

 

 

  
  
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
  
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
   
  
 
 
 
  
 
   
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
   
    
  
 
  

100 RETIRED PERSONNEL nv DEFENSE INDUSTRY

Admiral My statement bears on that, sir. . .
Mr. HEBERT. vWell, We cannot vary, Admiral. It is a Simple
ment. 
Mr. HEss. He said it. bears?? .
Mr. Oh, it bears. My hearing is off a little the morni 4
It bears, you say i . 
Admiral RICKOVER. It bears on the question; yes,_sir.
Mr. HEBEEL All right; good.
Admiral My statement is as follows: .
In my remarks before the other congressional committee, which
the basis for my appearance here today, I was discussing a cllmate .
business dealings With the Government rather than 
at individuals. I appreciate the. fact, that this committee "wants?
deal in Speci?c facts rather than in generalities. However, I was
ask the indulgence and conSideration of this committee in 
ointing the ?nger at individuals. After all, the improper use of i 
uence 15 a con?ict-of?interest situation whichis deemed a crimi?? 
o?ense under Federal law. By naming names, I might do injush
and unwittingly bring dishonor to good citizens.
As you gentlemen can well understand, in?uencein the nature of} 
case is a subtle thing. It? is not tangible. It is not black and wh?n?
I would not want to resume to adjudicate a decision by naming 
sons who might be olly within their legal rights in making re, .
sentations to the Government. .
In?uence in itself is not necessarily an evil thing. When a manufz'm
turer is faced with a cancellation of a wea ons roject, which mes--
that thousands of persons will be deprivedp of tlEeir livelihood, in?
ence to keep the project going its place is-?zn 1
necessarily out of order. .
These are the facts of life. Companies are entitled to use that
iIfif?uence to survive, and to make further contribution to the defen I
ort. . 
0n the other hand, in?uence can overstep legal as well as mo; . 'l
boundaries. PerSonally, I believe that efforts should be made byliL Cl
and by administration to discourage the use of in?uence. 
Members from both the House and Senate who appeared before thi'
committee have had legislative proposals." You entlemen in we
wisdom will be able to take what is sound and at is appropriaii
from the various legislative proposals.
On. the administrative Side you might want to consider recent:
mending to the Secretary of ?efense that he submit periodic reporjl:
to the committee listin all contacts which involve any business deal?
lugs between retired m1 itary o?icers and civil or military personnel? I
the Department of Defense.

_Th15 mi ht or might not be administratively workable, but I believt'
with goo an good intent there are some administrative corn
tributlons to be made 1n keep' this roblem within bounds.
And I would like to add there has never been one sin 
mcidence where any in?uence or anyone visiting me has had 
sl1ghtest 1mpact or ect on my program.

atever contracts my program has entered into have been decided

entlrely on atechnical basis. .
That is my statement, sir. 
. Hiinmn'r. Well, nobody would even su gest, Admiral, that all)",

body had any impact on you, from undue i uence. But the fact th?'

 

 

 

 

 

 IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

statement bears on that, sir. . . 
tannot vary, Admiral. It 1s a simple stay

1' I
rs. My hearing 1s off a little the mornin 

ears on the question yes, sir.

good. 

statement is as follows: 

he other congressional committee, which

.ce here today, I was discussing a climate? -

Government rather than? pointing 

late the fact that this committee wants. 

31' than in generalities. However, I won '1
consideration of this committee in 
.viduals._ After all, the improper use oft.
erest situation whichis deemed a crimjgl I:
By naming names, I might do injusti
[011013 to good citizens. 
all understand, in?uence in the nature oft
is not tangible. It is not black and whit .
me to adjudicate ?a decision by naming pa 
within their legal rights in making rep?j
ant. 
necessarily an evil thing. When a manufg-
allation of a wea one project, which meg 
will be deprive of their livelihood, 
oing its place "is If 

life. Companies are entitled to use the?)
0 make further to the defell'"

uence can overstep legal as well as me I
believe that efforts should be made by 
liscourage the use of in?uence.

House and Senate who appeared before-ti 
lative proposals. You enthen in you-
ie what is sound and at is appropriat 1
tproposals'.

aide, you might want to consider recent
of Defense that he submit periodic repo? -
contacts which involve any business den.
ry o?icers and civil or military personn 

be administratively workable, but I belie 
intent there are some admimstrative col.
eping this roblem within bounds. 
:ategoric y, there has never been one sin 1
tence or anyone visiting me has had ?a
my pro am.

)rogram as entered into have been decidld,

dy would even su gest, Admiral, that 8113!?
nu, from unduei uence. But the fact that

    
    
 
 
   
   
  
   
   
   
 

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY 101

. .- ouf testimony that former associates, admirals, and
it 111951033 to pressure you is of concern to this comm1ttee.
FAME-?llicnovnn. Well,that -

HEBERT. Wait, how. And in the study of this. roblem this

?3%th must have speci?cs and not generalities, to ow how-to

?min I understand that Kean do "refuse to give the names of these!

'atBS, admirals, or era

RIonovun. cannot refuse, sir. But I again point out to-

eoommittee,that you may be doing a ve injustice in taking what

1111 hi: have been in the nature of an or 'nary 'busmess dealing which .-

- 'did not consider as ressure and blazon this man?s
?3:211; And once a Iran?s name is mentioned 1n the
a ers he is condemned and you know that as Well as I do._

. The fact remains that you accepted these v1s1ts a:

mesures and in your own words ?until they found you were obtuse.

Admiral Ricnovnn. When I accepted these v1s1ts I d1d not know
what the "pressures?0r whether there would be any pressures. When
ja-sgy that there was an attempt to get me to do somethmg which I did

-mt:.aonsider justi?able, and which. the man who visited me my very 

milk?may Prg?i? ha? considered justi?able, then - I res1sted 1t.

itiono ressure. . .
Well, of cgurSe you must understand that In the broad
baggage that a man who is attempted to be brlbed 1s not necessarlly

hmAdmiral No one ever attemgted to br1be me, am

Mi: H?snnr. I didn?t say that. I sa1 1n the broad language. I
um- 11g to draw. an analogy, to show you what we are oonfron
withu?ere and what we are attem ing to gain from you. We cannot
pressed unless we know speci?ca what 1nd1v1duals are attempting
totoxort this ressure. . . .

Now, who or this is pressure 13 for the individual to de?ne hnnself,
in explaining what he meant by his wait. And my use of the. word
thribe?? was the same?I think it has been well sa1d, that 1f 1t 1s a
bribe it is too little, and if it is a gift it is_ too much?rather, If It 1s a
gift it is too much, and if it is a bribe 1t 1s not enough. [Laughton]

Admiral RIcnovnn. May I ask the 1ndulgence of t_h1s committee and
perha I could be permitted to make some observatlons Which I think
remedy this situation, rather than to_ name names 
in my own heart and mind would constitute an. improper nam_mg of
names, and do damage to people who are not actmg w1th .any crumnal
intent.

Mr. Well, the committee is still puzzled _as to wh you
secepted this as a ressure. Now, I am using pressure, 1n the uence
of these individua 3. They stopped coming to see you. .

Admiral RIGKOVER. Mr. Chairman, I told you that at the tune I
accepted these visits I did not even know what the . ose was.

Mr. H?eun'r. But you found out after they v1s1ted w1 you.

Admiral RIGKOVER. Yes. Then I took no action. But there have
been many peo le?there have been thousands of people 1n my ex-
grlence in the avy who have come to me w1th proaects whloh they,

"emselves, might have thought were quite smcere, were good for the

 

 

 

 

    
 

ERSONNEL . DEFENSE INDUSTRY

not. 'I'can?t say?Would you Want me .
say this. The committee will ask you to git 
of these individuals so that it will do no he."
now who they are, and then trace down their

iliation. Because this committee-has no deg; 
l0 desire to have any false inuendoes injects.
the 001nmittee will askyou to give in prism.
on the names of these individuals. And --

irman, shouldn?t that also include the pup

rect, the purpose of their visits, the" names 7?
companies with which they are connecting
ich they are connected.
order me to do so.

will, of course, have to obey your injunctiuu
That is clear?enough.
because I must. But I still in my opir?s
your committee to help solve this probh.
)me of the situations that arise.
Admiral. But we are trying to con?ne a:
m. At another time we may avail .
But at this particular time we are co a 
ans. Keep in mind that you are not a retin if
1'e duty. And we are not asking anybody in 
heir solutions at this particular time. 
3 at-this particular time we are confron ..
itiOllS.
the second part, in which projects were 
tre to mention those in public? Not indiviiH I
Name the projects. 
Chairman, that is a matter of opinion, - .
1 the Go'vermnent that think that I am coiftwl
am doing. The fact that they think I
necessar? out to be wrong. What I we 3,3,1
ring what I am doing is right and that all)?:
is wrong. 
3 testi?ed here the other day. Now, I won]
now that he may have had pressures excitei 
:he sense that I mentioned before, but it is'il?i 
lave pressures ut on him. Any contracts 
th .the Navy w' 1 do that. But he invari Hi I
ust say that he always backed me. And 7"
exercise of the functions of the Secretary c- 

1e responsibility of this committee to evalu 
pressures went.

a1 I am from here on out going to be put in".
5r deal with anyone from a business organiVJ
to give you a list of everyone that com?w.

to at you are asking me, sir.

 

     
 
 
  

RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE mousrnv 103

. Eur. No sir. We just want the military?the 'erals and
ma?a fornier associates that came to you, and his]: associa-
'?nrzs- We will not spread them on the pubhc record unless we _m our
dd ermimtion and in evaluation come to the conclusmn that 1t was
"nth-,9 in?uence. We are certainly not gomg to smear anybody 1n these

Admirlaj RIGKOVER. As far as your second question is concerned, I
do not believe it would do any good, because there is a constant differ?
mm of opinion in technical matters. 

31? r. HEBERT. Weli, we want to know about these opinions that you
hul- in connection With waste of money and unnecessary projects. . 

Admiral RIOKOVER. Well, I Will mentlon one that 1s the ?re right
Mm There are peo le in the Navy who think that we should build
mysmall reactors or very small submarines, and believmg as they
ghithey are trying to get a project like that into bemg. I do not agree
'vrilh them. So far I have been successful in stoppmg 1t.

Mr. HEBEET. All right. .

Admiral thxovnn. There is nothing wrong with them havmg their
api son, or with me having my opinion.

cut". HEBERT. And in connection with that, we would want to know
the? eople who put the ressure on you, since on mentioned that.

.21 iral RIGKOVER. ere are people in the avy that believe they
PM. ure on me.

r. Hansen. We want to know the

unlinirals', is somethin which will have an impact on the public. Now,
In want to know. at is the very reason for these hearings. _We
Ire-trying not to deal in generalities. We are trying to deal in specl?cs.
we cannot] 'slate or su gest legislatmn unless we know all the facts.
And that is 1liais?ilat we inten%

Mr. Hess. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HEBERT. Yes, Mr. Hess. 
Hues. If I understand correctl Mr. Chairman, you are not
interested in getting the names of peop in the Navy Department who
tirepn active duty now who disagreed with the admiral on some
prom 

Mr. HEBERT. Of course not.

r. Hues. What we are interested in are those generals and ad-
and high ranking of?cers who formerly served with you who
:tre'now retired and who have, as you say, attempted to use pressure

on; on
4 {?nal RIcnovER. I understand your statement, sir.
tan 1-.

Mr. HEBERT. And if these individuals went to higher-ups, to have
i119 higher-u come in and put the pressure on you. Now, this is your
1'3- e, iral, and not ours.

deral I have tried to explain my language. My major
1861:1011 to the situation was the fact that it took up so much of my

I under~

 



   
 
 
 
 
   
  
  
   
    
 
   
  
   
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
  
  
   
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
   
  
  
 
 
  
   
   
     
  
 
  
 
 

    

104 RETIRED PERSONNEL 1N DEFENSE INDUSTRY

. . . . 

time in order to avoid getting into projects which I did not considg I,

necessary. That was my real objection. 

. The type of business I do does not lend itself to-the sort of in?uen, 

which your committee is moStly considering. That-is, there are 33,;

trade associations. There is nothing like?what is it, the'Air Eon?

League, where. you have a lot of retired of?cers, who may be active 

this thing. There is no such thing in the atomic game today. 
"Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman. I

Mr. H?snnr. Yes, Mr. Price. '7 
Pnion. I think we should bear in mind that the "admiral

directs the Bettis Laboratory. And because of the very nature of h_
work, 'he is bound to be say, ressured-at least contacted by peopj 
Who-re resent a new industriali ty of work, in the new atomic 
From outside as well from the overnment, there are many di?e -,
911::1 Eleas on the type of reactors that can perform certain functie' 
an uties.

they have a good idea. . In some way, because the. recognize. the 
miral?s great work in this ?eld, the think that ey should get 
idea to Admiral Rickover, because Ii; is the head of the Reactor Di
Vision, and they want to, say, sell him the idea. So he hasa ve?j .
peculiar and a very dif?cult position. He is bound to hear from 131
outsi e. .

Another factor we have to take into consideration The peo 1e thy:
have this experience originally got 1t from only one place. Theyggj'
it from the old Manhattan District, or the Atomic Energy Go a 
sien, or from the military division that had something to do 
atomic energy, because this was the only source of this now. 
does have a very di??icult position to ?ll. .

I think that is most of the pressure that you would get, isn?t it,
Admiral 3

Admiral chxovzsn. Yes, sir.

Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Chairman. .
Mr, We recognize that, Mr. Price, and we are trying to-i 
practical and as understandin as we possibly can. But these worth
are the admiral?s words. Ant? by the admiral?s own admission, thi 
stopped coming to see him. So then he would be in the position of prist'
sentmg a front to to them, that'they wouldn?t even come back tos
him again. So having failed with him, they went over his head.

Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Chairman. 1 . I

Admiral, you think the word ?pressure? or ?discuss??did th? 
51mph come to you thinking in your estimation to discuss propose; 

at they may have to offer, or do you think that they came to you-10'
pressure you in anything? You use the word ?pressure.? 
Admiral RIGKOVER. Well . 

Mr. GAVIN. Now peo le might come to you that had a 
of inth with you to is'cuss some phase or technical matter. :Ydit

they wanted to. discuss it, or do you think they wanted to pl?ci?.
sure you to drop what you may have had in mind? 

 
   
  
   
     
   
   
  
  
 




  
 
 

Adm-i]
nuts. I
Lnlicves
her 

I. 0W1.
Item 13113
?eets

Corset
linen ent:
char-Pm
mem-

Now t1

Mr. G:
118 impac

Admin
there-are
he in?uer

this}: of
smiles
in some

dmirs

Mr. GA
?Mam
$3.159 3?
Admirg
you are do
Adaiira
Mr? Gm
popular 
has in
3.3.37.3. any
to him
Now I 
sexism-'1' fe
men cannt

.. - g, 
the best of
sides that I
Admiral
in the Defl
cits, where
alwaysl hat
Y.-
V'ated' by 
First, th
Yeti dif?cu
What. is ?oi:
Second, I
now steppe

if.

  

  
     

IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

.tting into projects which I did not consid-
real objection. I 
do does not lend itself to the 'sort of in?uen.
. mos considering. That is, there are. 3..
is nothing like?what is it, the'Air Fo?u
a. lot of retired o?icers, who may be active._.'
ch thing in the atomic game today.
1311. 
Price. 
should'bear in mind that the admiral d. -..
1e Navy because he has headed up for 
Division of the Navy Reactor Division. 1-
tory. And because of the very nature offs 
say, ressured?at least contacted by peep 
istria type of work, in the new atomic ?e 
from the Government, there are many di?? - .
reactors that can perform certain functi? 

 
 
 
 
  
  
   
   
 
 
  
 

ll reactor for a small submarine. A let,- 
ide the. Government laboratories, in some};
ms of the atomic industry. . They think t:
In some way, because they recognize the; 
is ?eld, the think that they should get i 
5r, because is the head of the Reactor-31$
i, say, sell him the idea. So he hasasy?

:ult position. He is bound to hear from 

to take into consideration: The peo le t! 
:inally got it from only one place. eye,
an D1strict, or the Atomic Energy Comm-
.ry division that had something to do 
h1s was the only source of this now. So 
position to ?ll. .

)f the pressure that you would get, isn?t 

as, sir.
man. .
gnize that, Mr. Price, and we are trying to 
andin as we possibly can. But these we
An by the admiral?s own admission,
So then he would be in the position off! 
m, that they wouldn?t even come back to"
tiled with him, they went over" his head. I
man. . .
he word ?pressure? or ?discuss??did th
king in your estimation to discuss propow
fer, or do you think that they came to you
5311 You use the word ?pressure.? I

:le might come to' you that had a diffel?
liscuss some phase or technical matter. 1'
:cuss it, or do you think they want6d to 
)u may have had in mind?

 

13) in?uen
i 

.1111}. Gavin. I am talki

RETIRED DEFENSE musrar 105

A. a1 RIGKOVER. Well, perhaps, the word ?pressure? is unfortu-
. . I think they wanted to discuss it with me. But when a man
,Eiieves in what he 1s domg, 1f he gets stopped in one place he goes

heru . .
is a fact of hfe that the Navy Department I do not be-
[mathat I would w1n a pepularity contest among the high ranking

- pets. . 
$60,156,111th people who wanted to get a glob?and it may have
m, Bum-31y. on our part to want at job?go around to

?hm-people 1n the Navy Department who were in a posltion to help

11.

HOW that is the nature of the word ?pressure?-?? .

Mr, Gevrn. It 1s quite evident that no matter what occurred it had
no impact uponyou 1n reaching any of your decisions; is that right?

Arhniral Ronovnn. Yes, air; that is right. 

Mia GAVIN. Now let me asktyou this question: Do you think that
?mare an other o?icers Department of Defense that might
or pressured on a roject? You are only talking about

rself. Now we are talking a out the whole defense, 'VVhat do you
hik ,of the character of men that we have representing us in the
.of defense? _Do you think they (can be'pressured into accept-

some particular prOJect? - 

. deral 310110371212. I would like to answer that question.
Or weapon or missile, unless they were correct? {if
. Of, course, Admiral, you are not competentto answer

IQSB you-don?t know. 

  
 
 
  



Admiral Rchovnn. Yes, I am competent to answer-that question.

.. in. Hnennr. If you are competent to answer a man?s conscience,

pa are doing pretty good. .-. .
Admiral RonovnR. No, sir; I am not talking4-?. . I -. .
about generalities. .He said he is not very
?lm-WE}; the upper ement or the upper branches of defense.
has mdicated that no matter who had come to himethey didn?t
any impact, on any suggestions or representations they-made
New I was wonde 'whether that is the General feelin on
lateral feelmg of allde our entire branches 3f defense, tiles:
man ,cannot be m?uenced, that the are very determined in their
and they try to reach conc usions from their experience t6
wheat of the1r ability 1n the particular projects or weapons or mis?
Sthet may be What do you think of the general?? -
Adrenal Bmoxovnn. I thm-k we have a very unfortunate situation

i1?. tha Defense Establishment, and probably 1n other executive agen?i



?twhere the pee 
. . . _o are a pos1t10n to make decismns 
$5351vath requlsn'? ability to evaluate the prohlelilii;
. - 1s ve . 
unate. And this has been aggra:
fact that science is advancing tremendous] I and 't -
W3 {il??icult for anyone except the ialist to reall y, rsta'1 n18;
oing on in a particular ?eld. Pee Hilde d?
due to the glamour of sta? duty, most naval o?cers' have.

being familiar with engineerlng.

 

 
   
 
   
    
     
  
  
   
  
   
   
 
  
   
  
 
   
  
  
  
 
  
   
  
  
  
  
 
 
   

   
   
    

106 PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY

So essentially you have people who come from Sea duty and a. 
assigned positions of responsibility, and with that position goes -
authority to make decismns, who are not really familiar with ti
technical problems. 

These people are considerably impressed by outside experts, paj-
ticularly anyone who has a title of ?doctor? in front'of his nan ..

When the see a situation, a matter going on, such as my 0 a"
zation, whic through hell and hi water has lasted for aboutilx
years, and which operates outside of the naval routine, there is mean 1
meat, and there is a natural human tendency. to listen more to p' i 
who come in and present anaceas. It is that sort of a pressure?Ire -.
the word ?pressure? in at sense.

It is also combined with a naivete of many retired o?cers. Fri. .1
the day they enter the Naval Academy they have led a sheltered exii ..
ence. They have not been faced with the rude facts of technical 15,1 
They have been used to ord people around, and it is very di?iei: 
for them, once they get out of %e service, toaccept the position whi . 

         
  
   
   
   
  
  
  
  
 
 

  
 

   

 
  

    

    
  
   

goes with retirement. 3
hey have many friends in the service. In many cases the ji' .

that the leave have been ?lled by ple who are their dear frien .

or even ple whom they have in?uential in appointing, a a?

naturally will -be listened to. I:

That 18 a fact of life. There is nothing criminal in a. It is ji- 
the way life works. m!

Now I resent this, what I called ressure, because people in 1 Pi
Navy Department who are above me ave been in a position to, a; .
up a great deal of my time, and I have had to ?ght and to devote}; 
time to that sort of a thing rather than to my major Job It has 1nd u.
fered with my work. .

But that is true in any ?eld of human e?-?ortjob just the way he wants to. He alWays has in?uences tii 
are trying to detract him. I am sure you have that in Congremif - 31'
as well as we haVe in the Military EstabliShmen . 

This is the thing I was addressm-g myself to. And I think th m;
can be administrative and legislative measures taken which won 1: [ti
prevent athing like this. 

. GAVIN. What is your idea of how to approach the problem, 5
clear up or clarify the situation 3 . Rae

iral Rucnovnn. I would make a de?nite distinction betwu'1 am

the jobs which retired of?cers can take. For example, the vast]: 
jority of retired o?cers get a job where they do technical work 
a company, and they have no contact with any policymaking gro'u -. me
in the Government. I see absolutely no objection to that. ?it
Another group which could be along that line would be anyone 11nd 3.,
the rank of captain or admiral, because of?cers through the rank . 
commander an lieutenant colonel are not by the nature of the case-w 5 (?it
aposition to exert. much in?uence . Inna;
believe it is where you get up to captain and admiral, andiit: 
in peeitions such as'Washing-ton representatives, or where due?te ta ?Pt
personal contacts they can in?uence policy. This is where I ?ii

 
 

you ecu-1d do some good.

  

?it

amt}

 

RETIRED PERSONNEL DEFENSE INDUSTRY 107

IN DEFENSE ETDUSTRY

have people who come from sea duty and 1 a possible way that you could help solve this roblem 1s by
reSponsibility, and with that position goes-t mm a regular report, say quarterly or someone .- y, of all con-
cislons, who are not really familiar with .1 . .- that o?icers or civ?1ans in the Defense Establishment have had
ILL. retired o?cers, and what the nature of the discussmn was.
insiderably impressed by outside experts, p: rule ]j_ke that placed in effect would have tremendous. in?uence,
ho has a title of ?doctor? in front of his hat. - me it, would stop the vast malonty of active people from having
nation, a matter going on, such as my orgai? . on policy matters w1th ret1red o?icers. 
hell and hi water has lasted for about; - '4 - MIN. Well, would that be a code of ethics or leg1slat1on, or
the naval routine, there is rose 

ttes outside 0 . . 
human tendemy ?30 113m more to ?l Lamiral RICKOVER. I think you would have to have a code of ethics,
nt anaceas. It is that sort of a pressure?41': . ?ght-cad by ing to church every Sunday.

1 at sense. g?y what? 
with a naivete of many retired of?cers. FIN $115513; RIGKOVER. Reinforced by going to church every Sunday.
Naval Academy they have led a sheltered It is quite evident that. they had no impact on you,
seen faced with the rude facts of technieal 4 my. . 

0 ordering people around, and it is very :nidmjral chxovnu. No, sir. No one?no retired of?cer, no military

tout of the service, to accept the position Wish-=- i no Member of Congress?has ever had any impact on me in

  

"'tmneetion.

iends in the same?. In many cases that - itm?d like to complete my answer to- our question. .

39h ?lled by P13 Who are their dear fries 3 O?e possible way of helping in this po 'cymaking part 18 to have a

[11 they have in?uential in appointing-i I es period before an o?icer can accept employment fwhi'ch
listened 130? shes on- policymaking?says 2 years, or so, before he could accept a

Fe. There is nothing criminal in it. It liai- - l?i'on 'of that type. That would afford an opportunity for his
'1 ediate associates, what with the frequent turnover in military
what I called ressure, because people in L. #0111181, toleave.
are above me ave been in a position to; j? ?mri-Gavm. How long do you think that period shouldbe?
time, and I have had to ?ght and to devote? . .Ldmiral Bronovnn. About 2 ears, sir?just for those positions,
hing, rather than '50 my 111310? iOb- It'has- h" that have to do with sort of a lo byin-g or aminor form of lobbying.
Lam not referring to a case where an of?cer does bona ?devteohinoal
my ?eld of human effort. No man can go 9.10.. -1rei"k. I would refer to the case where an oi?cer, for example, is em-
ray he wants to. He always has in?uences ti pki?ed in a certain Navy o?ice or, a naval representative at? a ship-
iim. I am sure you have that in Gangremfii gird or a factory, where he has contractual relations, or relations

. the Military Establishment. ?ush touch on expenditure-of Government funds?he should cer-
was addressmg myself to. And I think .1311! _i holly not be allowed to take a job with that company immediately
and legislative measures taken which win upon his retirement, no matter what his rank is. 
Mr. GAVIN. I yield to you. 
Efr. Hess. Admiral, would you apply that cooling-o?' period to a
Rtsewe O?icer who came from a corporation in the time of an emer-
I would make a de?nite distinction ?ay and when the emergency ceased to exist then he went back
o?icers can take. For example, the vast?! -- it? Could you have the cooling-oil period for him also?

rs get a job where they do teclmical work: admiral RICKovnn. Practically?I don?t think you would have that
have no contact with any policymaking ia? . . problem, sir, because as I see it the real di?iculty stems from very high
see absolutely no objection to that. i Wilt! Of?cers.- A Reserve of?cer who has only been around 8- short
could bealong that line would be anyoneum Wile- would apply a much shorter period of time for him,-1f at all.
admiral, because of?cers through the rank - ,1 he has had a particular job where he might hays exerted in?uence
nant colonel are not by the nature of the case ful?years, I mi ht require some delay. But I think you don?t really
hin?uence. i have 3- roblem erecaptain and admiral, an'dij Mr,? 8. Well, yen would have the problem with some colonels or
ashington representatives, or where due'te th ptains in the Navy, and colonels am the Armyjor' {hr
can in?uence policy. 'This is where I sugg- Il'?h?t??V?'hea m1ght be the Reserve and be 931186? 
They may be executives _of some large co oratlon that 1?s domg

s.
i your idea of how to approach the problem,"
.ituation 3 

 

 

a.
h?giless with the GOVernmentfand they are ca ed on active duty to
- '2 


. 9 .

 

 

  
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
  
   
 
  
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
  
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
   
   
  
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 

 
     
  

108 RETIRED PERSONNEL DEFENSE musrnr

Admiral Baonovnn. I think these are really civilians at hr I
They? are really more in a civilianeit is more of a c1v111an prolj -
than amilitarly roblem.

Mr. I-Inss.? ow, but in time of emergency they have been ca -
on active duty in a military ca acity.

Admiral RIOKOVER. I would be inclined to be much more leniegl,

this respect with Reserve o?icers. -'Of course, I would apply theg
rule, in; dealing with contractual matters?and I do take that liter; 

I mean if he has been in?uencing policy in contractual matters I th'
it would be wrong. for him to go .and- t?a? job with the company
was dealing with. I think that woul apply to anybody.

The Reserve of?cer does not generally have, the opportunityglu
in his service to develop the friendshi which are very closein- 
m1 itary, that the ar military peop do,

Mr. I-IEBERT. Mr. ardy. ..

Mr. --HABDY. Admiral, I believe in your prepared statement?.._
inferred. to the possible. desirability of requiring reports of meet}. 
with retired o?icers. Now, who would be required to report? .

Admiral I would sug%st_ that this .-
_Congress,- require the Secretary of efense to submit such a reg
at. periodic intervals?say quarterly or semiannually. Thererys
that such a rcport was required would sto - most contacts.- 1
.- Mr. I-IAzsnr. I mean, who speci?cally wit the Department WC 5
havetobe includedin thatre rt? . - 

Admiral I we include anyone whois contacted kl 
retired o?ceri relative to business matters. I think you wouldh 1
tomake it all-inclusive, Mr. Hardy. - - 

Mr: HARDY. Well, if you limit it to business matters, there-jg.
awful lot' of-gbusin - frequently transacted at a cocktail par. -
Would you include those? .- . . 

Admlral RIGKOVER. I would include that, sir. In-fact, much In .
?ness is conducted at cocktail parties. 
-- Mr.- HARDY. How would you ever make a determinationwith 
spetclt?to who went to the cocktail? parties and who they confej-
Admiral RIOKOVER. I would simply require that anyone on acti .
duty submit periodically'what contacts he had on 1governmentalghi 
ness matters with retired of?cers, regardless of ere it happened:-
whether it hap ened in his of?ce, at a cocktail. party, or on a beach-

Mr. HARDY. I would think 'you might have a little trouble get?n"
reliablere orts of that kind.? 

Admira RIOKOVER. Well, I disagree with you, sir. I-?believe?z
ta about something I know. I know the mentality of. pee -
the .. itary. _They are very honorable that way. And they are v: 
amenableto-obe ing instructions of that kind. 

Mr, HARDY. he ones you would want to catch ouldnot be 30
ones that would be likely to be involved in anything impro er.

- Admiral .RIoKovnn. Well, I am assuming we don?t have a. unch'??f'
crooks around. I- have to. z, . .. . .- 

Mr, HARDY. I would be pretty sure we don?t havet'ahunch of them
but I would be awfully surprised if you. don?t have a few. . 

Admiral" 11, Mr.- Hardy, if you in your wisdom 
the wisdom of Congress have ever b?en able to pass a law that evexfli
body will obey, I would like to know how you Ads.

?$55

a"

  

   
   
  
   
 

PERSONNEL 1N DEFENSE INDUSTRY RETIRED PERSONNEL IN DEFENSE INDUSTRY 109
?r HARDY- I would like to find out, too. But how we can reach
.. aha I,aI-tjcular-point is what is bothermg me. 
?Katina RIGKOVER. It is only one of many suggestions. It 1s a par-
"?ll tion. And I think it will do a great deal to stop tins. 
3ft I. Would you make this apply to ciinllans who have
Mg?y been in the military also?contacts w1th them? 
?Admiral Ricnovna. Yes, sir. I think that Government busmess
?mad he conducted in a businesshke way, in an of?ce where records

1 in?uencing policy in contraetual matters I {19' be kept. If it is done completely properly_there is no objection.
of him to go and 133 job With the company . gala-11 attempts to use busmess m?uence outs1de of proper busmess
think that to anybody. Mia?, this should he?l?e .orted. . . .

yr does not nerally have the Opportunityqj ?Emma I don 1sa With that idea. But I am wondenng

I think these are really civilians at he
to in a civilian?it is more of a civilian prob .
lem.

but in time of emergency they have been Gail 
1htary ca acity. 

1. I woul be inclined to be much more len'_ 
serve oi?cera 'Of course, I would apply the-,3
contractual matters?:and I do take that liter}. 

   

velop the mendshilpS,- which are very close 113i .
ular military poop do,
-Iard

y- ..
iral, I believe "in your prepared statement-z
ble desirability of- requiring reports of meat;

Now, who would be required to report? -
i. I would gest that this committee, or. .

Secretary 0 Defense to submit such a nej 

?say quarterly or semiannually. Thevery' 

as required would stop most contacts.~

who speci?cally within the Department .wu 
Lthatre ,rtg; 

I we (1 include anyone whois contacted-,3
to business matters. - I think you would .1:
re, Mr. Hardy. - 
if you lim't

it to business matters, there-t:

56a gmquen transacted at. a- cockta?-pa-
. I. would include that, sir. In fact, much Yb 

)cktail parties.

would you ever, make -a determination with. 

the cocktail: parties and who they confei

. I would simply require that- anyone on as:

ally what contacts he- had on 1governmentalby 

?red of?cers, regardless of ere it .hap eni?gf

in his of?ce, at a cocktail partythink you might have a little trouble geti?:
3t kind. 

_Well, I disagree'wah linear: 

mg I know. - I know the mentality of people-

're very honorable that way. And they are 11

nstructions of that kind. - . .
use you would want to catch would .not be
kely to be inVOlved in anything improper.

Well, I am assuming we don?t have a bunch 

etc.

(1 be pretty sure wedon?t havekabunch bf 1

[y surprised if you don?t have a' few.. 
-Well, Hardy, if you in your wisdom 91
ass have ever b?en able to pass a law that ev-
uld like to know how you do it. 

 

 
 
  
  
   
 

 

. metical standpoint ow on do it.
mixes -RICKOVER. Well, tlie practical standpoint is that. it
m?deo?cers knowing that such a report was requ1red would think
many times before they did deal With retired of?cers. on busmess mat-
?,an an informal basis. This would be the real nnpact of such 'a

it HARDY. Well, if former Secretary Wilson had a cocktail party

"tether-e, and invited a few military of?cers, do you think they

w?dmpoit-that? . . . . . 
Admiral It all pends?well no, unless Secretary Wil-
ui' them to buy a lot of General Motors automobiles. -

111-; Y. Well, if in the courseof'such a part .??and I am just
Wing that one would, ha pen. I haven?tany notlon that it would.
But if One should happen ke that, and in the course of that party
mention the sale ofautomobiles to the Government,
than .911 would say it should be reported? -

Adina} RIGKQVER. would. . . 
t?lr But how would you require it. to be reported; and how
yoube sure itwasreported? .. . - . 

. can never be sure it would be reported, but
1' ?ld assume .all these individuals were honest until they. were
prayed otherwise. . 

MLHARDY. Well, I wish we could assume that. 

Mr. Norblad. . . .
Mr. NORBLAD. In other words, you would apply the same rules, to
use 'le like Frank Pace or Charley Wilson or people of that nature??
hunger Secretaries of the Army and Navy, and Assistant Secretaries?'-
a's' you would tothe retired militaryAdmiral RIGKOVER. I would a ply i-t to-everyone.

Thank ou. - atis all.

Mr. -Mr. .hairman, I would just like to say, I think he
made. astron point. Of course .you won?t solve all these 
it?ll-l ,ut every dy on guard. -- - . - - 

'ral .RIGKOVER. That is correct, sir. I think the existence of
?nch a requirement might go 90 to 95 percent to doing away with this

HQ.
11'

  
  
  

Pro at youhave. .

r. . 0E. Would this report be limited to contacts with'person;

?1.31 who were outof-the servicejustfor a-period of 2 years?or re-

gard-less ofthe length?of-timetheyare retired? .. .- .1
A ral RIcnovnn. Yes, if this commitee recommended, and if such

8: Pale were adopted by Congress,- it would be during his entire term




u. 

 
    
  
  
 
  
  
 
 
  
   
 
   
   
   
  
  
  

  

   
  
  
 
   
  
   
   

110 RETIRED nv DEFENSE INDUSTRY

of retirement. However, if you gave a clean bill of health he
retired military of?cer who took a job after 2 years, you could:
longer hold him to account.

Mr. PRICE. You would have a limitation of about 2 years, or a
time limitation 3

Admiral RICKOVER. Yes, sir; some period that the committee -
cides on, before he can take a. job where he can in?uence contracts

Mr. HARDY. May I just follow up?

Mr. HERERT. Yes.

Mr. HARDY. Would you say, then, Admiral, if somebodg on an
duty in the military did engage in such a conference, an. didn?t
port it, you would have some punitive attachment to the individj

Admiral Ricnovnn. He would be disobeying orders. It wens-.51.
punitive just as for any other violation of orders. But people mg: I
military are sometimes not aware because they have lived a shell-s
existence?are not aware that it may be improper to do this sort

thin .

I believe if a report were required it would emphasize this sir
tion, and would do away with most of this problem. 

Also, by requiring 2 years, 3 years, or 5 years, before retired:
core can take jobs in various industrial associations which con 
tlhe Government. That is the real problem. It is that sort (if.
1: ing.

As I understand it, the object of this committee is to save a .. .
ment money, and to see that the money we do spend is- propel-I
spent. .

Mr. HARDY. I think that is one major purpose._ But certainly
also are a little bit concerned with in 'ty at the moment.

Admiral BicnovER. Well, Mr. Hard integrity can be de?n_' 
many different ways, depending on outlook of the indivi, ft:
That is a very hard thing to de?ne. And as I indicated beforeing- 
laws for thousands of years have been written to make people ha.
integrity. As I understand, there still have been failu . 

Mr. HARDY. Well, I am . not suggesting that it is a matter $1 I.
lends itself to legislation. But we are trying to ?nd some-way: 
improve the situation.

Admiral RICKOVER. I have tried to give you a practical sug . 
from my experience. I realize that you can ass all the laWs i
want to. It is not going to stop some of this. But if peoplej 
made aware that it is not the proper thing to do, and if they have 
report their contracts, they will think twice. . 1

Mr. HARDY. Mr. Kilday referred to it yesterday, and he refers

to social acceptability of improprieties. Now, that; of course, is
volved in this question of integrity. Sometimes we have wonder} --
whether maybe shady erations may have become soci_' 
acceptable in a lot of quarters. ll am not suggesting ?that that page
ticularly a plies to the military.

Admir chnovnn. Well, the military people, particularly siren
World War II, have" gotten themselves up on a pinnacle socially and.
.otherWise, and many of theme?they have positions of oat port?!
and responsibility while they are in the military, and it is di?dlil il
for them to unhorse themselves. . 
Mr. HEBERT. Like sir-Members of Congress?

   
 
       
       
   

   

  
  
 

 

   
 
  
 

 
 

   
 
 
 
 
  

    
      
 
  

   
    
     
       
 
   
     
    
 
 
 
 

  

  

  

  
 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 

  

 
 
 
 

   
 

  

  

 

  
 

  

  
 
 
 
 
   
   
   
   
    
  
 
   
 
  
   
    
  

PERSONNEL DEFENSE INDUSTRY

ever, if you gave a clean bill of health to, .
er who took a job after 2 years, you could .
aount.
)uld have a limitation of about 2 years, or s; .

. Yes, sir; some period that the committee. I
.take a job where he can in?uence contracts. .
just follow up? .
. 
I you say, then, Admiral, if somebod on aw}
did engage in such a conference, an didn?t
.ve some punitive attachment to the indivi . 2
He would 'be disobeying orders. It wouid 
my other violation of orders. But people in:
as not aware because they have lived a shelte
rare that it may be improper to do this soft 


were required it would emphasize this sis" 

1y with most of this problem.
2 years, 3 years, or 5 years-before retired - 

l. varIous industrial associatmns which cent" .
lat is the real problem. It is that sort ef'

the object of this committee is to save Govt ..
see that the money we do spend is- props 

that is one major purpose. But certainly .
mncerned with int 'ty at the moment. 
Well, Mr. Hardy, integrity can be de?ned 
depending on the outlook of the individt 
ing- to de?ne. And as I indicated before,'m? n.
years have been written to make people ha 
rstand, there still have been failures. 
I amnot suggesting that it is a matter -
tion. But we are'trying to ?nd some way}.l

I have tried to give you a practical sti: ..
I realize that you can pass all the 11153:: is
oing to stop some of this. But if peopled
not the proper thing to _do, and if they havg
twice. 
.lday referred to it yesterday, and he refern 
of improprieties. Now, ?that, of course, as
of integrity. Sometimes we have wond 
1y shady erations may have become social
quarters; am not suggesting ?that't'hat pal-U
military; 
Well, _the military people, particularly sing!
gotten themselves-up on a pinnacle socially as
of theme?they have positions of great powiil"?
11c they are in. the.military, and it is .di?iciill?
umselves. . 
2-Membns of Congress?

  
 

 

RETIRED PERSONNEL . DEFENSE 111

- vnn. Sir 3
a All WEI BI: 331119113 same as ex-Members of Congress 3

u,

.- a1 Blc?ovnn. Don?t for et, the subject of this discussion is
.. {red Military O?cers,? Mr.

airman. .
. . . No sir. You are in error. The subject of the whole
?g includes all civilian and ex?Members of Congress as well as

w?i?mcxovnn Yes, sir.

. The ex-Members are not immune either. 
. gim?al db I understand?in other words ,what you propose 1s
{a ?greet tlie same operation which organized baseball has? A ball-
31' who is approached must report.

*?hniral RIGKOVER. Yes, sir.

Hm . Thatis exactl whatyou- are saying?

ii?iniral RIOKOVER. Yes, sir. That is an excellent analogy.

311-. And if they are caught, well, of course, they are banned
?nmbaseball. .

Admirai chxovEn. Yes, Sir. . .

Hr. I am reminded of a story which I think 1s aprOpos to
hhisiproblem. don?t know how accurate 1t 15. But the story has
Helm told, because I have read it somewhere, about General Grant.

?hen he was quartennaster general _in St: Louis, I think it was, he
inward to the President to move h1m as they were gettmg



So this is not a new problem. .

Admiral RIOKOVER. o. I reahze that, sir.

And would like to add one other thing?the reason I have talked

=v'va thatIhave.
thi? that no member of this cemmittee, or of the Con' _ss,
would want to put me in a position where I would wreck my a llity
tutontinue my work. .

Mr. HEBERT. We are not intending to do that. And that IS the
reason?I think we have shown very clearly-? 

Admiral chxovEn. It would have this tendency, 1f I am'forced_ to
mention names where the man who visited me or who went to a superior
thought hewas doing theri ht thin . 

Mr. .. . . That wm?d- be \t committee?s responsib?ity?to
evaluate those names. And, certainly, it will not embarrass you and
embarrass the individuals named if there is no reason to be
embarrassed. .

Thank you very much, Admiral. We appreciate your appearance
here today.

Admiral RchovEu. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Mr. Courtney. .

Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, we have a correction ofthe record
from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Mr. Gates. It Is a hand-

delivered letter. It is dated July 8, 1959.
Let me thank you again for giving me thea?apportuni? to express my views??
Mr. I-IEBERT. Let there be order, please.
Mr. COURTNEY (continu1ng)?

.011 the subject of con?icts of interest. My visit with your committee con?rmed
my belief in the sincerity and Objectivity of its members.

 

 

. equ
ooncerned terminated th

mg ?re alarm systems through competitive bids.

Mr. continuing) 

I am certain that a report on this subject will
Department but, because my testimony on this 
fore may have Created a miminderstandin
reply. 

Sincerely,

oifending emp oyment and

be made to you ?by the HQ
cape was incomplete and the;
g, I single this item? out for pr" .

- Tnonss 8. Guns,
.Deputy 

T. Now, the. committee tomorrow morning at'10 o?cloi 

ngressman Stratton and Admiral Radford

1'1 10 o?clock. -
sub-committee adjourned.) 

mittee will stand adjourned .nnt
ereupon, at 11:54 13h