In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

352 chapter twenty “Lest Darkness Come” Louis Johnson was tough and resilient. The blow Harry Truman delivered in September 1950 was devastating, but Johnson had always been a¤ghter. He would survive. Johnson returned to preside over the law ¤rm he had built. Like Elihu Root, John W. Davis, and Henry Stimson who preceded him and Dean Acheson, Robert Patterson, Warren Christopher, Lloyd Cutler, James Baker, and others who would follow him, Louis Johnson would emerge again from the revolving door of government service and become a prodigious rainmaker for his law ¤rm with its thriving of¤ce in Washington. Loyal to the End? Except for those closest to him and clients who were dazzled by a man who had instant access to the White House and most of of¤cialdom in Washington, Johnson’s political standing faded quickly. On several occasions in the early and mid-1950s his name appeared in news stories indicating that he was considering a run in West Virginia for the U.S. Senate. But there is no evidence to suggest that he seriously contemplated such a move.1 And, in sharp contrast to what news magazines and pundits had been saying in 1949, there is no evidence that anyone ¶oated his name as even a dark horse presidential aspirant in 1952. In spite of the humiliation and pain that Truman’s dismissal brought to Johnson, he never turned on the president, nor did he ever directly criticize him. At the congressional hearings on General MacArthur’s dismissal in June 1951, Johnson was grilled for two days, and the Republican senators gave him plenty of opportunities to question the president’s judgment. Johnson chose not to rise to “lest darkness come” 353 the bait, but in a subtle, indirect way he did take issue with the president’s decision to ¤re him. When asked by a senator why he was “ousted” from the Defense Department, Johnson replied, “My answer is truthfully under oath, I don’t know; I don’t know to this day.” He went on to explain how he was forced to resign two days before the successful Inchon landings even though he had backed MacArthurand thepresidenton thedecision tolaunch therisky attack overthestrong objections of Army Chief of Staff Joe Collins. After extolling, if not bragging, about his military judgment and support of the president, Johnson concluded his answer, saying, “No. I do not know why I am out of the Defense Establishment.”2 By claiming he did not know why he had been ¤red, Johnson was suggesting thattherewasnogoodreasonforhisouster—certainlyacriticismofthepresident’s decision to demand his resignation. And by contending, as he did at the MacArthur hearings, thatthe successful Inchon landings “clearedupmuchof the criticism ” about him, Johnson was clearly implying that the president’s decision to ¤re him just twodaysbeforethelandingswasprecipitous andultimatelyunwarranted. Except for this indirect criticism of the president and occasional outbursts about Acheson and his policies, which of course also constituted indirect criticism of Truman, Johnson remained outwardly loyal and supportive of his old friend. Major book publishers, magazines, and newspapers begged Johnson to write, or have written for him, tell-all accounts of his experiences inside the Truman administration. Friends and supporters urged him to write his memoirs. But he steadfastly refused.3 Not until 1963, nearly thirteen years after his dismissal, was Johnson willing to grant a reporter an interview. Even then, what he said was bland. Johnson surprised the reporter when he opened the interview with the statement that he still considered Harry Truman a good friend.4 In fact, the two men did remain on good terms, occasionally writing to each other and exchanging birthday greetings and get-well cards.5 On at least one occasion after his ouster, Truman visited Johnson at his home in Clarksburg, and Johnson paid a visit to the former president when Truman came to Washington in 1955.6 From the day Truman ¤red him until the day of his death, Johnson continued to maintain, at least publicly, that he did not know why he was asked to step down. But this had to have been an arti¤ce, a convenient yet self-protective way to justify his behavior and avoid accepting responsibility for his actions. At the same time, by continuing to claim he had no idea why Truman got rid of him, he was trying to persuade others, and perhaps most important himself, that it was Harry Truman who was in the wrong. Subdural Hematoma In the spring of 1952, Johnson returned to...

Share