r himself an estimated profit of
about one million dollars, with practically no investment of his own
money, and at no financial risk.

A Senate subcommittee, which, in 1952, investigated this affair,
unanimously condemned the Holmes-Casey-Klein tanker deals as "morally
wrong and clearly in violation of the intent of the law," and as a
"highly improper, if not actually illegal, get-rich-quick" operation
which was detrimental to the interests of the United States.

Holmes and his associates were criminally indicted in 1954--but the
Department of Justice dismissed the indictments on a legal technicality
later that same year.

A few weeks after the criminal indictment against Holmes had been
dismissed, President Eisenhower, in 1955, nominated Julius C. Holmes to
be our Ambassador to Iran.

Enough United States Senators in 1955 expressed a decent sense of
outrage about the nomination of such a man for such a post that Holmes
"permitted" his name to be withdrawn, before the Senate acted on the
question of confirming his appointment.

The State Department promptly sent Holmes to Tangier with the rank of
Minister; brought him back to Washington in 1956 as a Special Assistant
to the Secretary of State; and sent him out as Minister and Consul
General in Hong Kong and Macao in 1959.

And then, in 1961, Kennedy nominated Julius C. Holmes for the same job
Eisenhower had tried to give him in 1955--Ambassador to Iran.

Arguing in favor of Holmes, Senator Prescott Bush admitted that Holmes'
tanker deals were improper and ill-advised, but claimed that Holmes was
an innocent victim of sharp operators! The "innocent" victim made a
million dollars in one year by being victimized. He has never offered to
make restitution to the government. Moreover, when questioned, in April,
1961, Holmes said he still sees nothing wrong with what he did and
admits he would do it again if he had the opportunity--and felt that no
congressional committee would ever investigate.

All Senators, who supported Holmes in debate, hammered the point that,
although Holmes may have done something shady and unsavory during the
three-year period in the late 1940's when he was _out_ of government
service, there was no evidence that he had ever misbehaved while he was
_in_ government service.

This amoral attitude seems to imply that a known chicken thief cannot be
considered a threat to turkey growers, unless he has actually been
caught stealing turkeys.

S