National Affairs: The Trial of Jacob Javits

Into the marble-pillared Senate Caucus Room one day last week strode Republican Jacob K. Javits, the attorney general of New York. He was about to repeat in open session what he had just told the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee behind closed doors: the charges that he had knowingly sought Communist help in furthering his career were false. The matter was urgent—both for Jacob Javits and the New York G.O.P. Five days later some 300 Republican committeemen were scheduled to meet in Albany to nominate a candidate for the U.S. Senate, and Javits was the leading contender.

The whispers of “Communist association” had begun soon after Jack Javits declared his candidacy for Senator Herbert Lehman’s seat (TIME, Sept. 10). Their only public source was Jay Sourwine, one time (1950-56) counsel to the subcommittee, who was seeking the Democratic nomination as U.S. Senator from Nevada (he ran a poor last in last week’s primary). Before the committee, Javits faced a basic question: Had he, after his release from the Army in 1945, sought the help of Communists or of the Communist-dominated American Labor Party in his first bid for Congress on the Republican and Liberal Party tickets? Javits’ reply: a categorical no.

“I Was New on the Job.” He was confronted with a statement by Dr. Bella Dodd, in 1946 a prominent New York Communist and Teachers Union leader who later broke with the party. Its gist: Javits had visited her in 1946 “in connection with his political career.” Replied

Javits: “To get educated” about New York affairs after his years in the army, he had called on scores of people—among them Mrs. Dodd. The visit had lasted “about ten or 15 minutes” and been devoted to teachers’ problems. He “had no recollection of knowing she was … an open and avowed Communist.”

On the charge that he had sought the support of the A.L.P., he admitted that the thought had crossed his mind until a Liberal Party leader had told him: ” ‘Don’t you know, Jack, that this A.L.P. crowd are Commie-dominated?’ And then I said I want no part of them . . . Aside from the muddle I may have been in in the 1946 campaign, when I was new on the job. I had no doubts about the A.L.P. there after.”

“I Would Be Astonished.” The hearing lasted 43 minutes and was followed by some confusion. Indiana’s Republican U.S. Senator William E. Jenner saw “inconsistencies” in the testimony. Despite Jenner, New York Republican leaders still thought that Javits was their best bet. And if they dumped him, the G.O.P. leaders feared that they would be open to charges of antiSemitism. This could be dangerous in New York City and in other areas where the Jewish vote is substantial. Some Republican leaders worried about the long-distance effect in Philadelphia, where a shift of the Jewish vote against the Republicans might hurt the hair-close re-election chances of U.S. Senator James Duff.

In the end Javits won the day. At his press conference, President Eisenhower said that ” I have never heard him say a word that wasn’t that of a fine, loyal American. If I am proved wrong, I would be greatly astonished.” Only a few hours before the New York State Republican convention was to meet, powerful Tom Dewey quietly passed the word that Javits was all right with him.