◆ SpookStack

question the reli that it was a matter for the Army to decide as t n they felt should be given to the statementg of such informants. i recognized this fact = indic Army had any question concerning the reliability of any particular this case, if he would direct a letter to the Bureau we would endeavor to furnish any additional ding our experience with the informant consistent with security. ily: -:.: he appreciated this fact but stated that he did not have time to direct such a letter to the Bureau since he was engaged in reviewing the matter apparently for the purpose of writing a summary on the case which "had to be out immediately." He further indicated that his inquiry had been satisfied, Y As you will recall, SMBs been identified as "Case No. 3 cited by Senator McCarthy on the"rioor oF the Sonate ted in the Congressional Record of February 20, 1950, It appears from closing remarks that the Army is aware of this and may be concerned over the fact that he is apparently still employed by the Army. Y It is noted that as investigated by the Bureau at the Army's request but as an applicant for a position with the Quartermaster General of the War Department. Our file shows that the Regional Loyalty Board of the Fourth Civil Service Region had jurisdiction over the adjudication of the loyalty case pertaining to Meigs since he was an applicant apparently for a classified position. We received a disposition from the Loyalty Review Board under date of April 15, 1919, reflecting that ad been "retained" ag an economist and educational specialist for the Department of the Army. This disposition, according to subsequent information set forth in file, was based on an adjudication of the case by the Fourth Civil Service Region Loyalty Board, Thus, the Army did not in fact adjudicate the loyalty case pertaining oy uu ability of the informant. He further pointed out to the Colonel ACTION: None. There is attached a copy of a summary of the information developed during the loyalty investigation regarding QP which was furnished to the Director by memorandum dated February 2h, 1950, if Connection with the original identification by the Bureau of 68 of the individuals mentioned by Senator McCarthy. It appears that the only purpose cor RIS call is the U probability that the Army is concerned over Senator “cvartny's allegations regard= ing ard is looking for an "out." It further appears that the Bureau has | fully discharged its responsibilities unjer the Loyalty Program in this case by providing reports to the Civil Service Commission in the first instance for further dissemination to the Army and in subsequently providing individual copies of the reports directly to the Army through Liaison channels, ly b1IC See ee