mittee met with the President on 22 May, Niles recommended to
Truman that he make no commitment on a watchdog group.[14-137]
Privately, Niles agreed with Clark Clifford that the committee should
be retained for an indefinite period, but on an advisory rather than
an operating basis so that, in Clifford's words, "it will be in a
position to see that there is not a gap between policy and an (p. 375)
administration of policy in the Defense Establishment."[14-138]

[Footnote 14-135: Interv, author with Kenworthy.]

[Footnote 14-136: Memo, Kenworthy for Fahy, 28 Apr 50,
Fahy Papers, Truman Library.]

[Footnote 14-137: Ltr, Niles to President, 22 May 50,
Nash Collection, Truman Library.]

[Footnote 14-138: Memo, Clifford for President, Nash
Collection, Truman Library.]

The President proceeded along these lines. Several months after the
committee presented its final report, _Freedom to Serve_,[14-139] in a
public ceremony, Truman relieved the group of its assignment.
Commenting that the services should have the opportunity to work out
in detail the new policies and procedures initiated by the committee,
he told Fahy on 6 July 1950 that he would leave his order in effect,
noting that "at some later date, it may prove desirable to examine the
effectuation of your Committee's recommendations, which can be done
under Executive Order 9981."[14-140]

[Footnote 14-139: _Freedom to Serve: Equality of
Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services; A
Report by the President's Committee_ (Washington:
Government Printing Office, 1950).]

[Footnote 14-140: Ltr, President to Fahy, 6 Jul 50,
Fahy Papers, Truman Library.]

_An Assessment_

Thus ended a most active period in the history of armed forces
integration, a period of executive orders, presidential conferences,
and national hearings, of administrative infighting broadcast to the
public in national headlines. The Fahy Committee was the focus of this
bureaucratic and journalistic excitement. Charged with examining the
policies of the services in light of the President's order, the
committee could have glanced briefly at current racial practices and
automatically ratified Secretary Johnson's general policy statement.
Indeed,